Visions of a Freeman - Brain Age - 31, May of 2014
Women forced to accept Academic Prostitution.

The BBC did a work about Prostitution and it not only tried to force people into a binary way of thinking, but it also hid some of the best options to consider prostitution wrong. Prostitution is not a black and white problem, not even a grey problem, it is a prismatic problem.

I will show you the difference between stupid, conditioning media that chokes the common sense of people, specially women by forcing incomplete extremes to the ethical issues of prostitution.

The material was taken from:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/ztkpcdm

The Title is: Prostitution: Is there anything wrong with selling sex?

The subtitle is: An ethical maze.

An ethical maze? You got to be kidding Me...

Anyway let's see what they write in each of the forced opinions.
 
Exploitation

Argument A: Most prostitutes are forced into it by traffickers or pimps, or are selling sex to support a drug habit.

Argument B: Trafficking and exploitation are problems in other sectors too, and the majority of sex workers have opted for sex work because the earnings are higher than from any other job they could get.
 

Argument C: Any prostitute that needs money in order to survive and is forced to have sex with a person the prostitute does not like is being exploited.

Argument D: Some prostitutes are educated into prostitution by a Pornographic culture and sex industry that seeks to exploit women and sex, without being traffickers, pimps or selling sex directly. That I call the exploitation of sex of the unwilling person who is dragged to prostitution by culture.
 
Criminalisation

Argument A: The risks and problems associated with sex work mostly stem from the fact it is a criminalised and stigmatised occupation.

Argument B: If prostitution was treated as a job like any other, there would be nothing to protect the most disadvantaged in our society from having to sell sex to survive.

Argument C: One of the main problems associated with sex work is mental illness and mental instability, hence psychological damage that often leads to drug abuse, thus increasing crime across society.
 
My business?

Argument A: Sex workers provide a service that many people value – it’s nobody’s business but the adults concerned.

Argument B: Men who use female prostitutes are paying to treat women as sex objects – prostitution perpetuates and encourages sexism of the worst sort.

Argument C: Anyone that provides a service needs to advertise it. It is society's business what kind of advertising it will allow, specially around children or vulnerable people.

Argument D: Sex Industry is not a consenting adult, it is a public business and so it is everybody's "business".
 
Sex = love?

Argument A: Prostitution is immoral, sex should be saved for intimate, loving, long-term relationships

Argument B: Sex means different things to different people, and it is oppressive for governments or religious leaders to tell us who we should and shouldn’t have sex with. 

Argument C: Any business that takes part in the Sexual Industry has to be regulated by the laws. The laws cannot have different meanings to different people. The laws state who can and cannot be involved in the sex industry.

Argument D: Prostitution is not love. Prostitution is material attraction, does not require spiritual love nor intellectual love, thus it is not a complete love.
 
Easy money

Argument A: Prostitutes have no morals, they are just after easy money.

Argument B: It takes skill and effort to make good money from sex work, and why single sex workers out for criticism – aren’t pop musicians and investment bankers after ‘easy money’?

Argument C: In order to define Morals or good social examples we have to consider morals to be the best example of civilized, family behavior, the sort you would expect in a good child. Morals are universal, if it is good for an adult, it is good for a parent, it is good for a child. In that sense it is never easy money, might seem like it for a prostitute, but not to society.

Argument D: The fact that people are corrupt, thus gaining money from corruption ("Easy money") does not mean that it automatically makes sexual corruption acceptable... What a disgusting argument the BBC published.
 
A caring job?

Argument A: Sex workers are like therapists, they assist the disabled and people with sexual problems.

Argument B: Just because you’re disabled doesn’t mean you can only have sex with prostitutes, and most clients don’t go to prostitutes for therapy, just for sex that they can control like a tap.

Argument C: Sex workers are not therapists, they often get disabled and people with sexual problems into a worse mental condition and create sexual addiction or help promote the idea that women do not deserve respect. In that sense a person addicted to buying prostitution as a drug can rape women when he runs out of money.

Argument D: A prostitute is in itself a disabled person that needs therapy. Effective therapy is done only by qualified mental health professionals. Sex is not a tool of medical therapy, a therapy is not a body activity, a therapy is a medical procedure far more complex than just having sex with a person that needs therapy as well. Again the BBC has gone totally insane with stupid arguments.
 
Health

Argument A: Prostitutes are considerably more at risk of contracting sexually transmitted diseases.

Argument B: As experienced professionals, most sex workers know a lot more about safer sex than other people. They are less at risk of STDs than people who have drunken one night stands. 

Argument C: Prostitutes are considerably more at risk of contracting mental disease (including drugs) and social diseases like family disintegration.

Argument D: A Prostitute is not an experienced professional. A professional is someone that uses academic knowledge and a recognized skill of Academic importance. Prostitutes are specialists, but they are not professionals.

Argument E: Most Prostitutes do NOT know they are at a higher risk of contracting mental and social diseases at a much higher rate than other people. They are at a much higher risk than people who have drunken one night stands.

Again the BBC has shown all it's harmful effects and it's lack of morals. That kind of media just contributes to get all of society sick and helps destroy families and promote crime.

It is not a joke, BBC is an essential part of Social Cancer.

I don't think society needs a media like the BBC, which has prostituted the whole meaning of Ethical Journalism, that which I have clearly just shown.

You don't want young woman being educated to read that garbage...

That is why: Academic media is the solution.

Back to index.