why prostitution should not be legal essay

Top 10 Pro & Con Arguments

Should prostitution be legal.

• Should Prostitution Be Legal?
• Sex Worker Views on Legalization
• Law Enforcement Views on Legalization
• Victimless Crime?
• Morality of Prostitution
• Human Trafficking
• Prostitution & Violence
• STD Prevention
• Legitimate Business?
• Government & Taxes

People who view this page may also like:

• Should Prostitution Be Legal? Top Pro & Con Quotes
• Should Marijuana Be a Medical Option?
• Percentage of Men (by Country) Who Paid for Sex at Least Once: The Johns Chart

ProCon/Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. 325 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 200 Chicago, Illinois 60654 USA

Natalie Leppard Managing Editor [email protected]

© 2023 Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. All rights reserved

• Artificial Intelligence
• Private Prisons
• Space Colonization
• Social Media
• Death Penalty
• School Uniforms
• Video Games
• Animal Testing
• Gun Control
• Banned Books
• Teachers’ Corner

Cite This Page

ProCon.org is the institutional or organization author for all ProCon.org pages. Proper citation depends on your preferred or required style manual. Below are the proper citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order): the Modern Language Association Style Manual (MLA), the Chicago Manual of Style (Chicago), the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA), and Kate Turabian's A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations (Turabian). Here are the proper bibliographic citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order):

[Editor's Note: The APA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

[Editor’s Note: The MLA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

To Protect Women, Legalize Prostitution

by | Oct 1, 2019 | Amicus , Criminal Justice , Labor and Employment , Sex Equality |

Prostitution is a sensitive subject in the United States. Frequently, arguments against prostitution center around concern for the health and safety of women, and those concerns are not unfounded. Prostitution is an incredibly dangerous profession for the (mostly) women involved; sexual assault, forced drug addiction, physical abuse, and death are common in the industry. For the women who work in this field, it is often very difficult to get help or get out. Many sex workers were sold into sex trafficking at a very young age and have no resources with which to escape their forced prostitution, or started out as sex workers by choice only to fall victim to sex trafficking later on. Moreover, since prostitution is illegal in most places in the United States, there are few legal protections in place for prostitutes; many fear that seeking help will only lead to arrest, and many who do seek help are arrested and then have to battle the stigma of a criminal record while they try to reintegrate into society.

So why is the response to such a dangerous industry to drive it further underground, away from societal resources and legal protections?

When people argue prostitution should be illegal, in many cases their concern comes from a place of morality , presented as concern for the health and safety of women. People believe that legalizing prostitution will only lead to the abuse of more women, will make it harder for prostitutes to get out of the industry, or will teach young women that their bodies exist for the sole purpose of sexual exploitation by men.

However, legalizing prostitution has had positive benefits for sex workers across Europe . The most well-known country to have legalized prostitution is the Netherlands , where sex work has been legal for almost twenty years. Bringing the industry out of the black market and imposing strict regulations has improved the safety of sex workers. Brothels are required to obtain and renew safety and hygiene licenses in order to operate, and street prostitution is legal and heavily regulated in places like the Red Light District . Not only does sex work become safer when it is regulated, but legalization also works to weed out the black market that exists for prostitution, thereby making women safer overall. Also, sex workers are not branded as criminals, so they have better access to the legal system and are encouraged to report behaviors that are a danger to themselves and other women in the industry. Finally, legalizing sex work will provide many other positive externalities , including tax revenue, reduction in sexually transmitted diseases, and reallocation of law enforcement resources.

It’s true that current efforts by various European countries to legalize prostitution have been far from perfect. In the Netherlands, certain components of the legislation , such as requiring sex workers to register and setting the minimum age for prostitution at 21, could drive more sex workers to illegal markets. Not only that, but studies indicate that legalizing prostitution can increase human trafficking.  However, even those who are critical about legalizing prostitution can recognize the benefits that legislation can have on working conditions for sex workers. If countries with legislation in place spend more time listening to current sex workers, the results of decriminalizing prostitution include bringing safety, security, and respect to a demographic that has traditionally been denied such things.

The underlying reason that people are uncomfortable listening to sex workers about legalizing prostitution has nothing to do with concern for the health and safety of women. If that were the genuine concern, prostitution would be legal in the United States by now. The underlying reason people disagree with legalizing prostitution is that prostitution is viewed as amoral because it involves (mostly) women selling their bodies for financial gain. However, telling women what they can and cannot do with their bodies does not come from a place of morality: that comes from a place of control.

People, especially women, sell their bodies for financial gain in legalized fashions on a daily basis. Pornography is legal, and so is exotic dancing. It’s common for people to have sexual relationships with richer partners so as to benefit from their wealth, whether this is through seeking out wealthy life partners or through the less formal but increasingly prevalent phenomenon known as sugar-dating . It’s also common for people to remain in unhappy relationships because they do not want to lose financial stability or spend money on a divorce.

So, what’s the difference? Why are these examples socially acceptable, even encouraged, but prostitution is seen as so appalling?

The difference is that in all of these other situations, it is easy for people to pretend that the women involved are not actually selling their bodies directly. It’s easy to pretend that the pornography actors are just people having consensual sex that the viewing public just happens to be privy to observing . It’s easy to pretend that exotic dancers are not actually selling their bodies because they are not directly engaging in the act of sex. It’s easy to pretend that people who enter into or remain in sexual relationships with wealthy partners could be there for reasons other than financial gain or security.

Prostitution does not allow the general public to have the benefit of these pretenses. Rather, the industry is honest about how sex and money are directly related. And for many individuals, this is an uncomfortable notion. It is even more uncomfortable for some people to believe that women should be allowed to have the control over their bodies that would permit them to engage in prostitution voluntarily; they cannot allow themselves to believe that women would choose such a profession. Yet rather than recognize this reality, those who oppose the legalization of prostitution march forth with arguments about concern for the safety of women. They fail to realize that criminalizing prostitution does not help sex workers, and their arguments lead to legislation that harms women while operating under the morally-driven guise of wanting to protect them.

Instead of forcing sex workers to conduct their business in unregulated black markets where their lives are in danger, all for a mislabeled purpose of “saving” women, take actual action to save women. Legalize prostitution, impose strict regulations, and construct comprehensive support systems that allow sex workers to do their jobs safely.

The desire to protect women from sexual abuse will always be valid, and if anything is a desire that should be more widespread in the United States. What is disingenuous is opposing legalized sex work for reasons that purport to be women’s safety, but that are actually coming from a place of discomfort over women openly engaging in sexual interactions for financial gain. If you are uncomfortable with the idea of women having sex for money, then you should also have a problem with pornography, exotic dancing, and people dating for money. If you do not have a problem with all of these socially accepted practices but have a problem with prostitution because it is “morally questionable,” then you have lost your right to any forum where decisions about the safety and rights of women are being made.

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Should Sex Work Be Decriminalized? Some Activists Say It's Time

Jasmine Garsd

LGBTQ, immigrant rights and criminal justice reform groups, launched a coalition, Decrim NY, in February to decriminalize the sex trade in New York. Erik McGregor/Getty Images hide caption

LGBTQ, immigrant rights and criminal justice reform groups, launched a coalition, Decrim NY, in February to decriminalize the sex trade in New York.

Sex work is illegal in much of the United States, but the debate over whether it should be decriminalized is heating up.

Former California Attorney General and Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris recently came out in favor of decriminalizing it , as long as it's between two consenting adults.

The debate is hardly new — and it's fraught with emotions. Opponents of decriminalization say it's an exploitative industry that preys on the weak. But many activists and academics say decriminalization would help protect sex workers, and would even be a public health benefit.

The Two-Way

Queen honors activist who fought to decriminalize prostitution.

RJ Thompson wants to push back against the idea that sex work is inherently victimizing. He says for him it was liberating: Thompson had recently graduated from law school and started working at a nonprofit when the recession hit. In 2008, he got laid off with no warning and no severance, and he had massive student loan debt.

Thompson became an escort. "I made exponentially more money than I ever could have in my legal profession," he says.

He says the possibility of arrest was often on his mind. And he says for many sex workers, it's a constant fear. "Many street-based workers are migrants or transgender people who have limited options in the formal economies," he says. "And so they do sex work for survival. And it puts them in a very vulnerable position — the fact that it's criminalized."

Thompson is now a human rights lawyer and the managing director of the Sex Workers Project at the Urban Justice Center. It's among several organizations that are advocating bills to decriminalize sex work in New York City and New York state. They already have the support of various state lawmakers .

TED Radio Hour

Juno mac: how does stigma compromise the safety of sex workers.

Due to its clandestine nature in America, it's extremely hard to find reliable numbers about the sex trade. But one thing is for sure: It's a multi-billion-dollar industry. In 2007, a government-sponsored report looked at several major U.S. cities and found that sex work brings in around $290 million a year in Atlanta alone.

Economist Allison Schrager says the Internet has increased demand and supply. "Women who pre-Internet (or men) who wouldn't walk the streets or sign with a madam or an agency now can sell sex work, sometimes even on the side to supplement other sources of income," she says.

So what happens when you take this massive underground economy and decriminalize it? Nevada might offer a clue. Brothels are legal there, in certain counties.

In Shrager's book, An Economist Walks Into A Brothel , she investigated the financial workings of the Nevada brothel industry. She found that on average it's 300 percent more expensive to hire a sex worker in a Nevada brothel than in an illegal setting. Shrager thinks it's because workers and customers prefer to pay for the safety and health checks of a brothel.

"Sex work is risky for everyone," she says. "You take on a lot of risk as a customer too. And when you're working in a brothel you are assured complete anonymity. They've been fully screened for diseases."

Goats and Soda

Legalizing prostitution would protect sex workers from hiv.

But many activists and academics say decriminalization would help protect sex workers and could also have public health benefits.

Take the case of Rhode Island . A loophole made sex work, practiced behind closed doors, legal there between 2003 and 2009.

Baylor University economist Scott Cunningham and his colleagues found that during those years the sex trade grew. But Cunningham points to some other important findings : During that time period the number of rapes reported to police in the state declined by over a third. And gonorrhea among all women declined by 39 percent. Of course, changes in prostitution laws might not be the only cause, but Cunningham says, "the trade-off is if you make it safer to some degree, you grow the industry."

Rhode Island made sex work illegal again in 2009, in part under pressure from some anti-trafficking advocates. That's the thing: The debate about sex work always gets linked to trafficking — people who get forced into it against their will.

Economist Axel Dreher from the University of Heidelberg in Germany teamed up with the London School of Economics to analyze the link between trafficking and prostitution laws in 150 countries. "If prostitution is legal, there is more human trafficking simply because the market is larger," he says.

It's a controversial study: Even Dreher admits that reliable data on sex trafficking is really hard to find.

Human rights organizations including Amnesty International support decriminalization. Victims of trafficking might be able to ask for help more easily if they aren't afraid of having committed a crime, the groups say.

Cecilia Gentili is the director of policy at GMHC, an HIV/AIDS prevention, care and advocacy nonprofit in New York. Erik McGregor/Getty Images hide caption

Cecilia Gentili is the director of policy at GMHC, an HIV/AIDS prevention, care and advocacy nonprofit in New York.

Former sex worker Cecilia Gentili says she might have been able to break free much sooner had it not been for fear of legal consequences. She left her native Argentina because she was being brutally harassed by police in her small town. She thought she'd be better off when she moved to New York, but as a transgender, undocumented immigrant, she says she had few options.

"Let's be realistic," Gentili says, "for people like me, sex work is not 'one' job option. It's the only option."

Gentili says that when police busted the drug house in Brooklyn where she was being held, she debated whether to ask for help. She figured she was in a very vulnerable position, as a trans, undocumented person. She stayed quiet.

These days Gentili is the director of policy at GMHC , an HIV/AIDS prevention, care and advocacy nonprofit in New York. She's advocating for New York City and state to decriminalize sex work.

Rachel Lloyd is the founder of Girls Educational and Mentoring Services, a nonprofit for sexually exploited women in New York. Jasmine Garsd/NPR hide caption

Rachel Lloyd is the founder of Girls Educational and Mentoring Services, a nonprofit for sexually exploited women in New York.

But many believe the sex industry is just fundamentally vicious and decriminalizing it will make it worse. Rachel Lloyd is the founder of Girls Educational and Mentoring Services , a nonprofit for sexually exploited women in New York. She says there's nothing that will equalize the power unbalances in the sex industry.

"The commercial sex industry is inherently [exploitative]," she says. "The folks who end up in the commercial sex industry are the folks who are the most vulnerable and the most desperate."

When she was a teenager, Lloyd sold sex in Germany, where it's legal. But she says that didn't make it any less brutal for her.

The Surprising Wishes Of India's Sex Workers

"Those power dynamics of exploitation were still there," she says. "When ... legal johns came in, they were the ones with the money."

Lloyd says she doesn't want sex workers to be persecuted or punished. But she doesn't think men should be allowed to buy sex legally. She says that would be condoning the same industry that brutalized her and the women she works with today.

But decriminalization activists say that sex work has and always will exist. And they say bringing it out of the shadows can only help.

Read more stories from NPR Business.

• prostitution
• sex trafficking

Legal Prostitution and Its Unintended Consequences

Post by: Sarah Stefaniak

My name is Sarah and I am a rising 3L. I interned this summer at Shared Hope International , a policy and research based non-profit for anti-human trafficking. In between research projects, involving a variety of topics related to the buyers, victims, and promoters of human trafficking, I had the chance to view many webinars. I learned information from a variety of professional backgrounds including police officers, psychologists, social workers, and survivors. I have wrapped up my internship with a host of new information about fighting against domestic human trafficking. In particular, I have an enriched perspective on the argument against legalizing prostitution

Many people who support feminist ideals of empowerment and equality argue that the United States should legalize prostitution. After all, allowing women the ability to choose if they want to sell sex as a means of living empowers women and embraces female sexuality. They argue that legalizing prostitution would allow the government to regulate and provide safety for prostitutes.

However, I would side with those who argue that legalizing prostitution is a mistake. The biggest issue with legalizing prostitution? The majority of prostitutes in America are not prostitutes; they are victims of trafficking. And often, these victims of trafficking are children. These children do not choose to sell their bodies for sex and often do not get to see the money from these exchanges. Granted, not everyone selling sex is a victim of human trafficking, but it is an overwhelming majority.

During this internship, I listened to stories of survivors who entered prostitution as a choice but due to the pressure of recruiting on the street and the need for protection from violent buyers, many women will eventually find their way to a trafficker. Soon, it becomes not a choice but an issue of force, fraud, or coercion. The arguments against legalization are much more complicated than a few paragraphs in a blog post. I cannot pretend to be an expert on the effects legal prostitution allows, but after serving a summer with Shared Hope, I find myself more passionate on the issue of maintaining criminalization.

As a proponent of this ideal, I want to clarify that these thoughts only scratch the surface of the argument against legalization. I am grateful for the information and thoughts that Shared Hope and other organizations like it have exposed me to and am thankful for the opportunity to work with them this summer.

This post was written by a Center for Global Justice Intern . The views expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect those of Regent University, Regent Law School, or the Center for Global Justice.

Recent Posts

• The Prison Project: Justice in Uganda
• For Such a Time as This: Interning with the National Center on Sexual Exploitation
• A Voice for the Voiceless: Interning with Jubilee Campaign and Just Law International
• Summer in France: Working for Law and Justice at the ECLJ
• From Strasbourg, France: European Center for Law and Justice

Previous Post A Silent Pandemic

Next post remember our brothers and sisters.

Comments are closed.

Please pray for our interns, staff and the organizations we support – that God would empower us in strategically making a difference.

Your financial resources fund internships and help us advance our operations. Make a donation now , or contact Mary Bunch to discuss how to optimize your giving.

Are you an advocate for the oppressed? Contact us regarding Regent intern opportunities and to let us know how we can best serve you.

Center for Global Justice ® Regent University School of Law – RH 225L 1000 Regent University Drive Virginia Beach, VA 23464

Phone: 757.352.4660 Fax: 757.352.4595 [email protected]

© 2024 Regent University. Center for Global Justice®.

• Student Opportunities

Is Legalizing Prostitution the Best Way to Tackle Sex Trafficking?

That seems to be the consensus among readers of our new piece on trafficking in the U.S . The most up-voted comment:

Over the course of his tenure, [Detective Bill Woolf with the Northern Virginia Human Trafficking Task Force has] interviewed over 300 victims. In many cases, those who have been exploited believe that they are offenders, Woolf told me. “They fear law enforcement…because they’re technically committing a crime and that is prostitution,” he said. Which is one reason why prostitution should not be a crime, and laws against prostitution play into the hands of the traffickers. Just as with drug laws, and prohibition laws about alcohol, all laws forbidding consensual sex for pay should be struck down. The prostitute needs to be able to get help from the police, and should not be subject to criminal penalties.

Another reader emails a long piece published in The Washington Post by Maggie McNeill, a former call girl and blogger : “This essay seems like a good place to start a discussion on fuzzy and conflated definitions, as well as shoddy research and misrepresented findings, found in alarmist articles about commercial sex work and sex trafficking.” Here’s McNeill:

Sex-work prohibitionists have long seen trafficking and sex slavery as a useful Trojan horse. In its 2010 “national action plan,” for example, the activist group Demand Abolition writes, “Framing the Campaign’s key target as sexual slavery might garner more support and less resistance, while framing the Campaign as combating prostitution may be less likely to mobilize similar levels of support and to stimulate stronger opposition.” But as sex worker rights organizations have repeatedly pointed out (as have organizations like UNAIDS , Human Rights Watch , and Amnesty International ), those who are truly interested in decreasing exploitation in the sex industry would be better off supporting decriminalization of prostitution .

New South Wales, Australia, decriminalized sex work in 1995, and a subsequent government-sponsored 2012 study found “ . . . no evidence of recent trafficking of female sex workers . . . in marked contrast to the 1990s when contacted women from Thailand were common in Sydney . . . ” New Zealand legalized prostitution in 2003. A study by the New Zealand Ministry of Justice five years later found “no incidence of trafficking,” and sex worker advocates say the law has made it easier for sex workers to report abuse, and for law enforcement to make arrests for crimes against sex workers.  

McNeill also insists that “most of the scary articles about sex trafficking are larded with inflated figures and phony statistics that don’t survive any serious analysis.” A few of her examples:

Another common claim is that there are 100,000 to 300,000 children locked in sex slavery in the U.S. (For just a few examples, see here , here , here , here , and here . ) That number is a distortion of a figure from a 2001 study by Richard Estes and Neil Weiner of the University of Pennsylvania, which estimated that number of “children, adolescents and youth (up to 21) at risk of sexual exploitation .” (Emphasis added.)  “Sex trafficking” was the least prevalent form of “exploitation” in their definition. Other forms included stripping, consensual homosexual relations, and merely viewing porn. Moreover, two of the so-called “risk factors” were access to a car and proximity to the Canadian or Mexican border. In a 2011 interview , Estes himself estimated the number of legal minors actually abducted into “sex slavery” was ” very small . . . {w}e’re talking about a few hundred people.” Yet the myth persists. The Dallas Morning News recently took the figure to new levels of preposterousness, claiming in an editorial last November that, “In Houston alone, about 300,000 sex trafficking cases are prosecuted each year.” As defense attorney Mark Bennett pointed out on his blog , the actual figure was two. Not 200,000. Just two.   The paper did print a correction , though the correction simply deleted the original 300,000 figure from the editorial. The paper still didn’t bother to mention the actual number, perhaps it didn’t support the alarmism in the rest of the editorial.

One of the most prolific skeptics of the new crusade against sex trafficking is Reason ’s Elizabeth Nolan Brown . In a November piece for her magazine , she makes a direct parallel to the disastrous War on Drugs:

The tactics employed to “get tough” on drugs ended up entangling millions in the criminal justice system, sanctioning increasingly intrusive and violent policing practices, worsening tensions between law enforcement and marginalized communities, and degrading the constitutional rights of all Americans. Yet even as the drug war’s failures and costs become more apparent, the Land of the Free is enthusiastically repeating the same mistakes when it comes to sex trafficking. This new “epidemic” inspires the same panicked rhetoric and punitive policies the war on drugs did—often for activity that’s every bit as victimless. Forcing others into sex or any sort of labor is abhorrent, and it deserves to be treated like the serious violation it is. But the activity now targeted under anti-trafficking efforts includes everything from offering or soliciting paid sex, to living with a sex worker, to running a classified advertising website. What’s more, these new laws aren’t organic responses by legislators in the face of an uptick in human trafficking activity or inadequate current statutes. They are in large part the result of a decades-long anti-prostitution crusade from Christian “abolitionists” and anti-sex feminists, pushed along by officials who know a good political opportunity when they see it and by media that never met a moral panic they didn’t like.

What do you think? Are skeptics like McNeill and E.N.B. misguided? Drop us an email and we’ll post the strongest counterpoints.

About the Author

More Stories

The Surprising Revolt at the Most Liberal College in the Country

‘Trump Hasn't Been the Wrecking Ball I Anticipated’

The Case for Fully Decriminalising Prostitution

Time to read

Editor's note: This post contains discussion of themes involving sexual exploitation and sexual violence.

During the research for this article, 15 dancers and 4 full-service sex workers were interviewed. The research helped provide a fuller picture of how legislation does and would operate for them and the unique struggles they face.

I.  Introduction

The sex work industry is diverse, and there are many sex workers operating within the United Kingdom (UK). The University of Bristol published a report on the nature and prevalence of sex work in the UK in 2019, [1] which identified 14 settings and services of sex work such as brothels and glamour modelling. The report made it clear that sex work involves a wide variety of jobs, including independent and agency escorting – referred to here as prostitution to reflect the use of the term in legislation – lap-dancing, and webcamming. Additionally, the report estimated that there are 85,714 individuals operating as street-based and indoor sex workers within the UK. The large numbers of sex workers and the variety of areas that they operate in make it clear that sex work cannot be ignored, and ways must be found to support the individuals who work in this industry.

Within the UK, some forms of sex work such as lap-dancing are legal, whilst prostitution is partially decriminalised. This means that although it is not a criminal activity to exchange sex for money, many of the activities surrounding prostitution are criminalised. For example, it is currently illegal to manage a brothel, advertise sexual services in the immediate vicinity of a public telephone, and persistently loiter or solicit on a street or public place for the purposes of prostitution. [2] One negative consequence of this criminalisation is that sex workers must operate in a situation of danger - if they are exposed to physical or sexual violence from clients, they are discouraged from going to the police for fear of prosecution. Criminalisation also makes it harder for those involved in sex work to move out of the industry because of the resulting criminal records.

This article will argue for the full decriminalisation of prostitution in order to foster safer relationships between sex workers and clients and reduce the societal stigma of sex work. This decriminalised system should be accompanied by limited legislation, making certain aspects of prostitution legal, subject to regulations. This article will examine the UK’s laws surrounding lap-dancing to argue that any government-led system of legislation will be unsatisfactory, thus, any legislation should be sex worker-led.

II.  The distinction between prostitution and sex slavery

It should be noted that the sex trade, otherwise known as sex trafficking, is not the same as prostitution. The sex trade involves the illegal practice of transporting individuals from one place to another for the purposes of sexual exploitation. Prostitution should be decriminalised, whereas sex trafficking should remain criminal. The fact that prostitution and sex trafficking are both currently criminalised perpetuates the negative stereotype that all sex work is inherently exploitative of sex workers. Victims of sex trafficking are sex slaves, not prostitutes.  Exemplifying this difference is the relationship of the prostitute with the brothel-owner, versus that of the sex slave with their sex trafficker. Brothel owners are business people, owning establishments where prostitutes can meet and engage with clients whilst working as independent contractors. They support a safer and more organised environment for prostitutes to work in. Conversely, sex traffickers sell individuals for sex against their will, often in unsafe environments and to unsafe individuals. An important difference between sex slaves and prostitutes is the relationship of trust between the prostitute and the brothel owner and/or client as compared to the relationship of fear and coercion between the sex slave, sex trafficker and sex purchaser. The law should act to protect individuals from being forced into sex work, and punish those who force them into it.

In Julie Bindel’s article, ‘Why prostitution should never be legalised’, she writes that ‘prostitution is inherently abusive’. She notes that ‘every sex trade survivor [she has] ever interviewed’ believes so. [3] However, the ‘sex trade’ that she talks of is trafficking, which is not a form of sex work. She has interviewed women who have been victims of sex trafficking, an inherently abusive area of crime. If Bindel were to talk to those in the sex work industry, not the sex trade, she would find that prostitution has the potential to be life-saving, empowering, and a positive experience for individuals in the industry. Lap-dancers, for example, work in a legalised area of sex work in the UK; they sell a sexual service, similarly to prostitutes. Their experience is a useful indicator of the way that individuals involved in sex work can maintain ownership of their lives and livelihoods, even using their profession to take greater ownership. In a recent survey of 300 lap-dancers by the University of Leeds, not only was it established that 84% of lap-dancers were satisfied with their job and had a positive body image, but also that one third were using their job to fund new forms of education and training. [4]

Legislation currently makes both sex trafficking and many elements of prostitution illegal. Both the legislation and those who wrote it seem to refer to prostitution and sex trafficking interchangeably. Dame Diana Johnson proposed the ‘Sexual Exploitation Bill’ on December 9 th 2020. It aimed to make it illegal to pay for sex. In the first reading of this bill, Johnson justified this by drawing on testimonies of those who had been sex trafficked. There is a clear legal link between prostitution and sex trafficking, which perpetuates the stigma that sex work is ‘dirty’ and all sex workers are forced into it. This does not reflect reality. One of the darker consequences of the law perpetuating this stigma is that it manifests in hate and violence towards sex workers. [5] Often, those who have participated in the industry are unable to leave due to the negative association that their prospective employers have with sex work. Legislators should act to remove the stigma to allow sex workers to move out of the industry more seamlessly, and to reduce violence against sex workers. This requires the decriminalisation of prostitution, as will be explored.  

III.  Is sex work a legitimate form of work?

Though this may perhaps not be the view of the general public, it is argued here that sex work is a legitimate form of work. Women should be able to choose what to do with their bodies, and legitimising sex work supports this assertion. Decriminalisation and legislation would be a step towards convincing the public of this, as minds will not change unless the law does. For example, the 1983 British Social Attitudes Survey found that 17% of respondents thought that same-sex partnerships were ‘not wrong at all’. In 2010, the same survey found this increased to 45%. After homosexual marriage was legalised in 2013, this percentage rose to 64%. Though this may be a reflection simply of a shift in attitudes, these statistics illustrate how society can grow to accept some things it once condemned. The law can do much to reduce the stigma against sex work and promote its acceptance, as it has done for homosexual relationships. It can be argued that, unlike homosexuality, sex work is a choice, one that women do not have to make. A further objection is that sex work is inherently dangerous, putting women at risk unduly. Finally, the same opponent may argue that, in any case, could the government not simply invest more into social care, preventing the need for prostitution at all? To answer this, the first response is that sex work does not have to be dangerous. Decriminalisation will be the first step towards making prostitution a safer form of sex work, whilst legislation can ensure that women working in the industry as lap-dancers are safe, being surrounded by appropriate security measures. Further, the ability to earn more in this industry provides independence for mothers and women as well as a level of financial stability that cannot be provided by government social care. These benefits, with the mitigations of risk which legislation will bring, would outweigh the detriment to sex workers.

IV.  The consequences of criminalising prostitution

The stigma around sex work, particularly prostitution, manifests in violence against sex workers. In a 2013 report, the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommended the decriminalisation of sex work to reduce the physical, sexual, and emotional violence experienced by sex workers. [6] The WHO found that the stigma against prostitution, perpetuated by its criminalisation, can cause prostitutes to become isolated by family and friends, a form of emotional violence. In some cases, this can result in increased difficulty for sex workers to leave abusive relationships. The criminalisation and resulting stigma surrounding prostitution put power in the hands of abusive partners; for example, it means they can threaten sex workers with the loss of custody of their children. The report also found that measures against prostitution can provide the police with a cover for the abuse of prostitutes, where prostitutes are detained or arrested on criminal charges associated with their work. [7]

Another way in which the criminalisation of prostitution empowers abusers is through discouraging sex workers from reporting violence they experience to the police. The 2013 report by the WHO found that, due to the fear of prosecution for participating in prostitution, individuals are heavily discouraged from going to the police. [8] This results in acts of physical and sexual violence towards sex workers going unreported; in this way, the law operates to allow their rapists and abusers to walk free. Thus, sex workers are forced to trade their safety for financial gain, exposing themselves to more dangerous interactions with clients who believe that they can harm their provider and remain unpunished. Criminalising prostitution results in an unbalanced power dynamic between the prostitute and their client, often resulting in physical and sexual violence. The current illegality of prostitution means that environments where sex workers operate are unsafe. The University of Bristol’s report on the nature and prevalence of sex work revealed that those in illegal brothels were told not to report violence occurring within the premises, [9] as to do so would alert the police to the existence of the brothel, leading to raids. Managers would be arrested for running the brothel, and prostitutes would lose their livelihoods. [10] In some cases, the managers of the brothel could be the sex workers themselves. [11] Prostitutes working at the brothel could be arrested on criminal charges for trying to report violence they experienced while simply trying to make a living. If prostitution were decriminalised, brothels would be able to provide greater safety for prostitutes, which they are unable to do so at the moment due to the risks involved. The stigma perpetuated by criminalisation not only fuels violence against sex workers but causes that violence to go undetected. Fear of police persecution and stigma may also prevent sex workers from accessing health and social care, including HIV treatment and support. It was reported that HIV cases in sex workers could decrease by as much as 25% if physical and sexual violence against them was reduced. Such a reduction can clearly be facilitated by decriminalisation, [12] as the removal of legal barriers could help prostitutes feel more comfortable and supported in going to the police and health and social care services.

Many prostitutes engage in the industry for survival purposes. The current welfare system in the UK has serious flaws, meaning that many feel they have no better choices. There are 390,687 social homes in the UK [13] , whilst there are 1.16 million households on relevant waiting lists. [14] Improving the welfare system and encouraging other opportunities would be a starting point, but for many sex work is the best option, especially when many households remain on council house waiting lists for years. Making the industry safer for those who feel it is the easiest and most lucrative option respects the bodily autonomy of women. In this sense, it is particularly relevant to consider the effect of increasing criminalisation on sex workers. The ‘Sexual Exploitation’ Bill proposed by Dame Diana Johnson criminalises another element of sex work, which will further harm sex workers. Criminalising those who pay for sex is harmful to sex workers because it means that prospective clients are more likely to be dangerous, and they will be more difficult to find. This means that to get work, providers may be forced to make risky trade-offs between their physical and financial health due to the elevated bargaining position of the client. In some cases, this involves offering ’bare-back’ services, which are services involving sex without a condom.

It follows that there should be decriminalisation of prostitution. Decriminalising prostitution will do much to reduce the stigma surrounding the industry. This illustrates that prostitution is legitimate work as opposed to underground crime, whilst supporting the distinction between sex trafficking and sex work. Prostitution could take place in a safer environment, where prostitutes are less afraid to go to the police and face a decreasing stigma from friends and family.

V.  The possibility of legislation

Along with this decriminalisation should come some form of legislation. Legislative rules, however, are often put together by a team of government agents who have little idea of how the sex work industry works best for sex workers. This includes an intricate net of processes that come before the physical relationship between provider and client begins. One can imagine a perfect system of legislation which works well for sex workers, but this will likely only be achieved where sex workers are involved in developing the legislation which will govern their industry. Government-led legislation is more likely to be damaging than beneficial. [15]

The issues with the likely system of legislation are evident upon close examination of the lap-dancing industry, a legalised sector of the sex work industry. This sector of British nightlife is governed by section 27 of the Policing and Crime Act 2009, together with Schedule 3 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Policies) Act 1982. Previously, lap-dancing was governed by the Licensing Act 2003, but the 2009 Act reclassified lap-dancing venues as ‘Sexual Entertainment Venues’ (‘SEVs’), [16] and lap-dancing is now regulated under the 1982 Act. Following a House of Commons briefing paper on how lap-dancing clubs are licensed, Schedule 3 of the 1982 Act means that local authorities can choose to renew the license of a SEV based on factors such as the ‘character of the relevant locality’. [17] Their powers are far-reaching. Local authorities can issue or renew a license whilst imposing conditions or restrictions on the individual license or all licenses issued in that locality more generally. This can include restrictions on the venue’s opening hours, the way dancers and customers interact, and the sale of alcohol at SEVs.

Regulations imposed upon SEVs due to the 1982 Act can be very harmful to both the dancers' independence and safety, since they can affect the way dancers and customers interact. [18] Regulations introduced into SEVs allow local authorities to ban certain aspects of a dancer’s performance, despite what the dancers themselves may feel comfortable with. Most local authorities ban touching within SEVs. However, customers to the SEV often know that they can barter with dancers to get increasingly sexual services, such as touching for a higher price. In speaking to dancers during the research for this article, it became abundantly clear that the current regulations increase the danger which dancers are exposed to, despite the fact that the legislation purports to reduce the presence of such dangers. When dancers provide these touching services, which are against the licensing conditions, they are forced to hide their activity. If the touching is banned, one might argue that the dancer should not be doing it. This would, after all, remove all danger. However, the potential of profit is enticing for those dancers who do not mind being touched. How dancers conduct their business should be based on their comfort, not the views of a local authority. They are independent contractors. One might argue that touching should be banned because it presents a danger to dancers. However, the current situation is more dangerous for dancers. Rather than closely monitored touching, they expose themselves to greater risks by doing it secretly. If dancers could choose the activities they did within their dances and would not be penalised by their club for doing so, the transaction between dancer and customer would be much safer. Dancers would be able to openly enforce their boundaries. This fully respects the bodily autonomy of dancers. Dancers who are tempted to choose the risk for the potential profit would feel less pressured to offer services they are uncomfortable with because they would no longer be able to charge a much higher price based on the secrecy of the service. If local authorities could not impose such rules against the will of dancers, then those dancers who are comfortable with offering certain services would not need to do so in secret. In this way, the far-reaching nature of the current legislation is harmful to dancers.

Finally, dancing is not a salaried job. As dancers are independent contractors, the money they make is entirely dictated by their skill and negotiating power. This applies to all forms of sex work and is essential to understanding why, if the government adopts legislation relating to prostitution, it should be sex worker-led. The current legislation yields regulations which restrict the business choices of the dancers themselves, illustrating a picture of a government which does not view sex workers as individuals who have agency over their bodies. Further, a government which does not view sex workers as individuals who can make intelligent choices about how to run their businesses. The benefit of sex worker-led legislation on prostitution is its facilitation of the independence that dancers have been struggling to have for decades. It would embrace the comfort levels they already have in their job as independent contractors – for example, the choice to offer touch services. It would promote safety in the exercise of these choices and uphold the bodily autonomy of dancers.

VI.  Conclusion

Prostitution and sex trafficking are not the same. The former involves a choice to participate in trading sex for money, whereas the latter does not. There should be complete criminalisation of sex trafficking. The current criminalisation of prostitution, however, is unsustainable. It perpetuates the harmful stigma towards sex work; this results in sexual, emotional, and physical violence towards sex workers. Full decriminalisation, on the other hand, presents an image that sex work is accepted by society and by law.  An appropriate legalised system is possible, but only with the full input of the sex workers involved. They have been operating their businesses for years and have built valuable skill sets and unique knowledge of their needs. The downfalls of a legalised system designed without the input of those involved can be seen from the lap dancing industry's legislative framework, which reduces dancer independence where they are self-employed and forces them to make riskier choices.

[1] Marianne Hester, Natasha Mulvihill, Andrea Matolcsi, Alba Lanau Sanchez, and Sarah-Jane Walker, ‘The nature and prevalence of sex work in England and Wales today’ (Centre for Gender and Violence Research, University of Bristol, October 2019). <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/842920/Prostitution_and_Sex_Work_Report.pdf> , accessed 23 February 2022.

[2] Natalie Smith, ‘Overview of the Criminal Law and the Sex Industry in the UK’ ( Adult Industry Services, 11 June 2019) <https://adultindustryservices.com/2019/06/11/criminal-law-and-the-sex-industry/> accessed 23 February 2022.

[3] Julie Bindel, ‘Why prostitution should never be legalised’ The Guardian ( 11 October 2017) <https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/11/prostitution-legalised-sex-trade-pimps-women> accessed 23 February 2022.

[4] Teela Sanders and Kate Hardy, ‘Research on lap-dancing in England: Preliminary findings’ (University of Leeds, 2010) <https://democracy.towerhamlets.gov.uk/documents/s68743/The%20Regulatory%20Dance%20-%20Midway%20findings.pdf> accessed 23 February 2022.

[5] Womenstrikeuk18, ‘It’s time for the decriminalisation of sex work in the United Kingdom’ ( Decrim Now, 8 February 2019) <https://decrimnow.org.uk/2019/02/08/its-time/> accessed 23 February 2022.

[6] World Health Organisation, Addressing Violence Against Sex Workers (2013) Ch 2 < https://www.who.int/hiv/pub/sti/sex_worker_implementation/swit_chpt2.pdf > accessed 23 February 2022.

[9] Marianne Hester, Natasha Mulvihill, Andrea Matolcsi, Alba Lanau Sanchez, and Sarah-Jane Walker, ‘The nature and prevalence of sex work in England and Wales today’ (Centre for Gender and Violence Research, University of Bristol, October 2019). <https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/842920/Prostitution_and_Sex_Work_Report.pdf> accessed 23 February 2022.

[11] https://news.sky.com/story/hundreds-arrested-for-running-brothels-as-sex-workers-say-its-the-laws-that-are-criminal-12117653

[12] World Health Organisation, Addressing Violence Against Sex Workers (2013) Ch 2 <https://www.who.int/hiv/pub/sti/sex_worker_implementation/swit_chpt2.pdf> accessed 23 February 2022.

[13] Ministry of Communities, Housing and Local Government, Local Authority Housing Stock <https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/local-authority-housing-stock> accessed 23 February 2022.

[14] Lucie Heath, ‘Just one social home delivered for every 175 households on waiting lists’ ( Inside Housing , 17 December 2020) <https://www.insidehousing.co.uk/news/news/just-one-social-home-delivered-for-every-175-households-on-waiting-lists-69035> accessed 23 February 2022.

[16] Policing and Crime Act 2009 s 27.

[17] Local Government (Miscellaneous Policies) Act 1982.

[18] Kashmira Gander, ‘How laws are putting strippers in greater danger’ ( Independent , 21 February 2017) <https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/love-sex/strippers-uk-laws-licencing-act-2004-dancers-nighttime-economy-sex-trafficking-sexual-offences-a7590071.html> accessed 23 February 2022.

Legal Prostitution Top 10 Pro & Cons

Read the main arguments in the debate over whether prostitution should be legal, with a look at issues including the morality of prostitution, human trafficking, health, and economics.

ProCon/Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. 325 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 200 Chicago, Illinois 60654 USA

Natalie Leppard Managing Editor [email protected]

© 2023 Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. All rights reserved

• Social Media
• Death Penalty
• School Uniforms
• Video Games
• Animal Testing
• Gun Control
• Banned Books
• Teachers’ Corner

Cite This Page

ProCon.org is the institutional or organization author for all ProCon.org pages. Proper citation depends on your preferred or required style manual. Below are the proper citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order): the Modern Language Association Style Manual (MLA), the Chicago Manual of Style (Chicago), the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA), and Kate Turabian's A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses, and Dissertations (Turabian). Here are the proper bibliographic citations for this page according to four style manuals (in alphabetical order):

[Editor's Note: The APA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

[Editor’s Note: The MLA citation style requires double spacing within entries.]

• Founding Advisory Board
• Privacy Statement
• Courses Offered
• Stem Writing Pedagogy
• Summer Writing Institute
• Online Writing Institute
• Upcoming Events
• Past Events

Why Prostitution Should be Decriminalized

Prostitution has long been considered a lewd and blasphemous act. Even as more progressive attitudes have become mainstream, prostitution is still criminalized in almost all states in the United States. Zhang’s piece addresses and rebuts the three most common arguments for criminalizing prostitution and calls for the decriminalization of prostitution to regain liberty and autonomy. This editorial was written for Professor Christopher Kutz’s and Haley Anderson’s Spring 2024 seminar, “Philosophy of Law.”  

When my friend told me that she was paying off the tuition for her PhD program with the money she earned working as an escort, I was shocked. I had never considered prostitution as compatible with self-empowerment.

In the past, prostitution was considered a lewd and blasphemous act, inconsistent with female virtues such as chastity and decency. Even though that oppressive era has passed, our culture has internalized the longstanding stigmatization around prostitution. In almost all states in the United States, prostitution is criminalized. However, criminalizing prostitution not only backfires as a solution to various problems, but it also undermines individual liberty and autonomy in making decisions about one’s body.

What are the common arguments against prostitution?

Prohibitionists often raise three types of arguments—about exploitation, public health, and degradation—but all three are shortsighted.

First, some worry that decriminalizing prostitution could expose disadvantaged groups to exploitation, such as sex trafficking, violence, and coercion. While these are real-world problems, criminalizing prostitution is far from the solution. Banning prostitution doesn’t mean eliminating it. We shouldn’t be oblivious to the fact that prostitution still exists in the black market despite prohibitions.

These sex workers are more vulnerable because they cannot resort to the law to protect themselves against abusive treatment for fear of prosecution. By contrast, numerous studies have shown that decriminalizing prostitution would bring the industry into the realm of law, redirect attention from prosecuting commercial sex to prosecuting the crimes that are the actual causes of the harm, [1] which could prevent sex trafficking, violence, and other kinds of danger. [2]

Second, some are concerned that legalizing prostitution would cause public health issues, such as HIV transmission. Studies have shown the opposite. A 2018 review of over 130 studies discovered that repressive policing practices actually increase the risk of HIV infection and other sexually transmitted diseases, as protections like prophylactics could be used against sex workers as evidence in court. [3] The right way to prevent and solve public health issues is by providing a better healthcare system and encouraging risk reduction strategies.

Third, prostitution is critiqued as objectifying individuals, rendering them to mere means rather than ends in themselves. Prohibitionists see prostitution as a form of “paid rape,” arguing that banning prostitution is “saving” sex workers from these coercions. [4]

However, taking away the choice of prostitution is, itself, paternalistic and patronizing. It assumes that some people are not capable of making rational and responsible decisions, and that therefore the state should decide for them. [5] Furthermore, we all treat other people as means to some degree. If I pay someone to cut my grass, I am also paying for a certain service provided by another’s physical exertion. But the process of getting consent, which may result in commercial transactions, is a recognition of one’s autonomy as a human being—as an end and not as a mere means.

Is the state justified in interfering with private decisions?

In the realm of criminal law, we need to ask another important question: Does the state have the right to interfere with individuals’ private decisions about what to do with their bodies?

Some might argue that the law should match morality and sanction immoral behaviors. [6] Indeed, it is a tempting position to take, as we tend to believe that it is the call of justice to discourage immoral acts in society. However, people’s moral views are diverse and pluralistic. They not only vary among individuals but also change with time.

It is thus impossible and unhealthy for a society to legally enforce one specific view and stymie others. For one thing, we cannot be sure that the morality enforced is correct, as history has proven time and time again. For another, giving the state the power to interfere with individual liberty and to dictate individual actions would greatly undermine the foundations of democracy.

How, then, do we decide whether an act should be criminalized? The brilliant mind, John Stuart Mill, provided us with an insightful answer back in the nineteenth century: by evaluating the harm of the conduct. For Mill, the only justification for interfering with the liberty of an action is self-protection. [7]

For a state to be justified in reaching into individuals’ personal lives and criminalizing private conduct, it must be preventing harm to others. Since the selling or buying of sex services is an action between two individuals with mutual consent, taking place in a private space and having no foreseeable impact on other parties, the state should not have the right to prohibit the action under criminal law, independent of morality.

Some argue that private conduct can also cause harm to society. High Court Judge Patrick Devlin, for example, contends that since shared morality is the binding force of society, private conduct that infringes upon morality is putting society at risk of collapse and should therefore be punished. [8] Indeed, morality does help keep society together.

However, Devlin neglects the plurality of values and lumps morality into one simple, universal consensus. On top of that, he fails to recognize the sociological pattern of evolving morality throughout history. Changes stir up debates, and what comes after is nearly always a more inclusive and less oppressive society—not the apocalypse that Devlin fears.

It’s time to solve the problem and take our autonomy back!

There are around two million sex workers in the United States, generating a total of more than fourteen billion dollars. [9] If prostitution is decriminalized and becomes taxable income, the extra government revenue could be used to provide health care benefits for sex workers to ensure their mental and physical health, fund programs to eliminate human trafficking, and set up departments for regulating and standardizing the industry. This is how we should solve “the problem” of prostitution—not by criminalizing it and turning a blind eye, but rather by ensuring safety and fair treatment and preempting social issues with welfare safety nets.

By decriminalizing and regulating prostitution, we can not only maximize overall social welfare but also make sure individuals’ bodily autonomy and liberty are respected—not paternalistically denied. No one should be criminalized because they engage in consensual sexual activities, whether money is involved or not. This effort to keep the state away from people’s bedrooms and individuals’ private decisions is about more than just bedrooms; it is about championing our own liberty and autonomy.

[1] Crichton F. (2015, August 21). Decriminalising Sex Work in New Zealand: Its History and Impact. openDemocracy. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/beyond-trafficking-and-slavery/decriminalising-sex-work-in-new-zealand-its-history-and-impact .

[2] Law, S.A. (1999). Commercial sex: Beyond decriminalization. Southern California Law Review , 73, 526–610. Manch T. (2018, April 17). No Trafficking in NZ Sex Industry but Migrant Abuse Is Widespread, Report Finds. Stuff . https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/103129627/no-trafficking-in-nz-sex-industry-but-migrant-abuse-is-widespread-report-finds .

[3] Platt L., Grenfell P., Meiksin R., et al.  (2018, December) Associations Between Sex Work Laws and Sex Workers’ Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Quantitative and Qualitative Studies. PLOS Medicine 15(12), https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002680 .

[4] Matsubara H. (2006). The 1910s Anti-Prostitution Movement and the Transformation of American Political Culture. Japanese Journal of American Studies . no. 17: 53-69, http://www.jaas.gr.jp/jjas/PDF/2006/No.17-053.pdf .

[5] Shiffrin, S.V. (2000). Paternalism, Unconscionability Doctrine, and Accommodation. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 29(3),Princeton University Press.

[6] Mill, J.S. (2013). On Liberty. In J. Feinberg, J. Coleman, & C. Kutz (Eds.), Philosophy of Law (9th ed., pp. 445-446). Cengage Learning. Original work published in 1859.

[8] Devlin, P. (2013). The Enforcement of Morals. In J. Feinberg, J. Coleman, & C. Kutz (Eds.), Philosophy of Law , (9th ed., pp. 469). Cengage Learning. (Original work published 1965)

[9] Sawicki, D. A., Meffert, B. N., Read, K., & Heinz, A. J. (2019). Culturally Competent Health Care for Sex Workers: An Examination of Myths That Stigmatize Sex-Work and Hinder Access to Care. Sexual and relationship therapy: journal of the British Association for Sexual and Relationship Therapy , 34(3), 355–371. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681994.2019.1574970.

The New York Times

The learning network | should prostitution be legal.

Should Prostitution Be Legal?

Questions about issues in the news for students 13 and older.

• See all Student Opinion »

This summer Amnesty International passed a resolution supporting the decriminalization of sex work. The organization decided that decriminalization is the best way to defend sex workers’ human rights and lessen the risk of abuse they face. But will making prostitution legal only increase the demand for sex workers, without actually protecting them from the violent abuse and exploitation that is common in the industry?

Should prostitution be legal?

Rachel Moran, the founder of Space International, which advocates the abolition of the sex trade, argues in this Op-Ed that prostitution should not be legal:

I entered the sex trade — as most do — before I was even a woman. At age 14, I was placed in the care of the state after my father committed suicide and because my mother suffered from mental illness. Within a year, I was on the streets with no home, education or job skills. All I had was my body. At 15, I met a young man who thought it would be a good idea for me to prostitute myself. As “fresh meat,” I was a commodity in high demand. For seven years, I was bought and sold. On the streets, that could be 10 times in a night. It’s hard to describe the full effect of the psychological coercion, and how deeply it eroded my confidence. By my late teens, I was using cocaine to dull the pain. I cringe when I hear the words “sex work.” Selling my body wasn’t a livelihood. There was no resemblance to ordinary employment in the ritual degradation of strangers’ using my body to satiate their urges. I was doubly exploited — by those who pimped me and those who bought me. I know there are some advocates who argue that women in prostitution sell sex as consenting adults. But those who do are a relatively privileged minority — primarily white, middle-class, Western women in escort agencies — not remotely representative of the global majority. Their right to sell doesn’t trump my right and others’ not to be sold in a trade that preys on women already marginalized by class and race. The effort to decriminalize the sex trade worldwide is not a progressive movement. Implementing this policy will simply calcify into law men’s entitlement to buy sex, while decriminalizing pimping will protect no one but the pimps.

Gillian Abel, an associate professor and head of the Department of Population Health at the University of Otago in Christchurch, New Zealand, argues in this Room for Debate piece that prostitution should be legal:

Sex work is an occupation that many women voluntarily choose. To deny that prostitution is work not only infringes on women’s right to choose their work, but also on that of men, transgender and gender-diverse individuals. And denying sex workers the right to do their work legally infringes on other rights, such as their access to legal aid and recourse. In 2003, New Zealand was the first country to decriminalize sex work for the workers, their clients and third parties (minders, pimps, landlords, or anyone else who may receive money from sex workers’ earnings). This move allowed sex workers to operate under the same legal and labor rights as any other occupational group, and makes them less vulnerable to exploitation. New Zealand sex workers are now able to govern their own work, collaborating with their peers or electing to use third-party management, such as a brothel operator. Sex workers can now request police assistance if they are exposed to violence, report crimes without fear of being held accountable for involvement in the illegal acts themselves, and seek support services. This has already begun to play out. A police officer went to jail in 2010 for coercing a sex worker into providing free sex by threatening her with traffic fines. In another case last year, a sex worker was awarded $21,000 after successfully bringing a sexual harassment lawsuit against the operator of the brothel where she worked. (The sex worker liked her work but objected to the manner in which the operator of the brothel was treating her.) Prior to decriminalization, it would have been impossible for a sex worker to legally challenge bullying and exploitative behavior.

Students: Read both articles, then tell us …

— Should prostitution be legal?

— Is sex work an occupation that many women voluntarily choose? Does denying sex workers the right to do their work legally infringe on other rights, including their access to legal aid?

— Does making prostitution legal make women less vulnerable to abuse by criminals? Does it give sex workers the same labor rights as other occupational groups? Would it make women safer?

— Or, will making prostitution legal lead to higher rates of human trafficking without solving the issues of abuse and exploitation?

— Ms. Moran recommends the “Nordic Model” (or the “Equality Model”) as a better way of protecting prostitutes than decriminalization. She explains:

The concept is simple: Make selling sex legal but buying it illegal — so that women can get help without being arrested, harassed or worse, and the criminal law is used to deter the buyers, because they fuel the market.

Do you think arresting and inhibiting johns is a better approach?

Students 13 and older are invited to comment below. All comments are moderated by Learning Network staff, but please keep in mind that once your comment is accepted, it will be made public.

What's Next

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Should Prostitution Be Legalized?

To the Editor:

I disagree with Rachel Moran that “ Buying Sex Should Not Be Legal ” (Op-Ed, Aug. 29).

The way to actually prevent a 14-year-old from being lured into the sex business is to legalize it, regulate it and tax it. By doing so, you can monitor and protect under-age woman from going into the trade.

At the same time, by legalizing it, you allow consenting adults to pay for a service that they feel they need and for women to earn a living in a manner they can choose, or not. It is time we stop telling people how to live their lives, while at the same time enforcing protections for the youths who do need it.

PETER G. HILL

Weston, Mass.

I agree with most of Rachel Moran’s criticism of Amnesty International’s recommendation that the consensual sex trade be decriminalized.

In my opinion, the best way to provide greater safety for prostitutes would be to make it illegal to purchase sex from someone who is under the control of another person such as a pimp or brothel owner. In addition, pimps should be prosecuted, and brothels should be prohibited unless they are owned and operated solely by the prostitutes who work there.

Unlike the “Nordic model,” in which it is legal to sell sex, but always illegal to buy sex, I believe that it should be lawful to buy sex from a prostitute who is self-employed, including working in a group or collective with other self-employed prostitutes.

I believe that this approach would go further to promote the safety and autonomy of prostitutes than the Amnesty recommendation. It also recognizes that there may be some prostitutes who have freely chosen to be in their trade.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and  log into  your Times account, or  subscribe  for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber?  Log in .

Want all of The Times?  Subscribe .