Wulfie's Wurld

Commentary: Prostitution

Before you read any further, go back and reread the commentary about legislating morality. We'll wait for you.

Back so soon? Hm. Oh well, let's move on.

I'm a capitalist. I'm a firm believer in free enterprise and that if there is a market for goods and services, an entrepreneur should be able to make a profit. As long as nobody gets hurt by the goods or services, and take the responsibility to do the market and consumer research, and make and informed buying decision, there should be no restrictions.

So what's this got to do with Prostitution?

To understand that, we need to agree on what Prostitution is. Fortunately, we already have an agreement. It's called "English." We communicate because we all agree on certain standard meanings for words, and if we have a disagreement, we check the authoritative source listing the standards. It's called a "Dictionary." Granted, with the advent of "spell checking," many of these dictionaries haven't been opened in years, but believe it or not, dictionaries do more than just help with diction and more than just help with spelling. The words have standard meanings. Prostitution is defined by "Webster's Ninth Collegiate" as "the act or practice of indulging in promiscuous sexual relations esp. for money." Sex for money.

So why is that bad? Well, one can assume that it's bad either because sex is bad or making money is bad.

For the following discussion, let's assume the standard "guy paying the girl for sex" scenario. If we took away the money aspect, would it be okay? Is it okay to have sex if money doesn't change hands? Or is it the amount of money involved? The hundred or two hundred (whatever the going rate is) may be too small. When a guy marries a girl, he turns over all of his paychecks for the rest of his life for what amounts to a season pass. Is the current "pay per view" of prostitution too cost effective, or is it too expensive. Shouldn't that fall under a "caveat emptor?"

Or is it the sex that's bad? If prostitution is bad because sex is bad, why do we have sex so often? Perhaps it's the sex that should be outlawed.

Or is it the lack of love in the exchange? Should having sex without love be made illegal? Wouldn't that affect many married couples as well? How do you determine if love is involved? Would it be okay if the guy and the prostitute each said "I love you" before exchanging either money or bodily fluids?

I've seen it suggested elsewhere that there's a bigger issue concerning the subjugation of women. There are some who feel that a woman should not have control over her own body. When married, she becomes the property of the husband. When she's not married, ownership becomes a tad more iffy. Perhaps feudalism is making a comeback.

I, for one, don't understand why prostitution is illegal. It goes against my inner capitalist.