1NC
OFF
Aff must say what “US” and what “legalize nearly all” means—vote neg
Fairness—legalize can include hundreds of regulations which radically alter the
case neg we need- makes the aff a moving target and spikes out of our disads
Topic education—confusion over what legalize means kills productive debate
over sex work
PEN, Prostitutes Education Network, Last Modified Sunday, August 10, 2008 2:40:54 PM “Prostitution Law Reform: Defining
Terms” Definitions Legalisation and Decriminalisation according to Scarlet Alliance, Australia from PRINCIPLES FOR MODEL SEX
INDUSTRY LEGISLATION Scarlet Alliance and the Australian Federation of AIDS Organisations,
http://www.bayswan.org/defining.html ac 8-17
Many (or most) societies that allow prostitution do so by giving the state control over the lives
and businesses of those who work as prostitutes. Legalization often includes special taxes for
prostitutes, restricting prostitutes to working in brothels or in certain zones, licenses, registration
of prostitutes and government records of individual prostitutes, and health checks which often
means punitive quarantine. The term legalization does not necessarily have to refer to the above
sorts of regulations. In fact, in one commonly accepted definition of legalization, legal can
simply mean that prostitution is not against the law.¶ Legalization ¶ From sociological perspective,
the term legalization usually refers to a system of criminal regulation and government control of
prostitutes , wherein certain prostitutes are given licenses which permit them to work in specific
and usually limited ways. Although legalization can also imply a decriminalized, autonomous
system of prostitution, in reality, in most "legalized" systems the police are relegated the job of
prostitution control through criminal codes. Laws regulate prostitutes businesses and lives, prescribing health
checks and registration of health status (enforced by police and, often corrupt, medical agencies), telling prostitutes where they may
or may not reside, prescribing full time employment for their lovers, etc. Prostitute activists use the term legalization
to refer to systems of state control , which defines the term by the realities of the current
situation, rather than by the broad implications of the term itself.¶ Because of the range of
definitions of legalization , it is difficult to use the term in a discussion of reform. When the
general public concerned with civil rights, privacy, etc., call for "legalization," they may not be
aware implications of that term , or of the problems inherent in many legalized systems.
OFF
Prostitution includes the seller and the patron- they leave half of the laws against
prostitution on the books
Birckhead, 11 -- UNC Chapel Hill law professor
[Tamar, "The 'Youngest Profession': Consent, Autonomy, and Prostituted Children,” 2011, Washington University Law Review, 88
Wash. U. L. Rev. 1055, l/n, accessed 6-21-14]
n177. See, e.g., Alaska Stat. § 11.66.100 (2007) (defining the act of prostitution to include both the person who accepts a fee in
exchange for sex as well as the person who makes the offer); Wis. Stat. Ann. § 944.30 (West 2005) (defining the act of
prostitution as applying equally to sellers and buyers).
Even the broadest possible interpretation of nearly all is 51%
Miller, 98 – ABC correspondent
[Judy Miller, ABC Correspondent, and Catherine Kenney, teacher, 8-3-1998, ABC News, "A Closer Look," l/n, accessed 2008]
JUDY MULLER: (voice-over) But what does "nearly all" mean exactly? CATHERINE KENNEY: Our understanding at the meetings
that we've had is that we can have a very broad interpretation of that. It could be 51 percent, you know,
really kind of
pushing it .
Independently, Nordic
model does not legalize
Kennedy, 14-- Postmedia News staff
[Mark, "Tory government’s new prostitution laws will likely target pimps, customers and sex-trade traffickers," National Post, 4-2714, news.nationalpost.com/2014/04/27/harper-governments-new-prostitution-laws-will-likely-target-pimps-customers-and-sex-tradetraffickers/, accessed 9-20-14]
The federal government is poised to introduce legislation in the coming weeks that will overhaul Canada’s prostitution laws —
possibly targeting the pimps and johns as criminals while leaving the prostitutes themselves free from criminal prosecution. Justice
Minister Peter MacKay has been exploring various options since the Supreme Court of Canada struck down Canada’s prostitution
laws last December, giving the government a year to come up with a new law. Among the alternatives being examined is a
Canadian version of the “Nordic model” — an approach first used in Sweden which then spread to Norway and Iceland — in which
police target prostitutes’ customers, pimps and sex-trade traffickers. Earlier this month, MacKay said his bill will be drafted to find the
“right balance” to a “complex” issue. Two things have become apparent: the government will not decriminalize or legalize
prostitution, as some other countries such as New Zealand and the Netherlands have done; and the governing Tories appear to be
contemplating the Nordic model.
Vote neg for precision and ground- these are two entirely different debates
Miller, 4 -- Coughlin Stoia Geller Rudman & Robbins LLP
[Coty, J.D., former Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law senior editor, and Nuria Haltiwanger, ACS Infrastructure
Development CEO, J.D., "Prostitution and The Legalization/Decriminalization Debate," The Georgetown Journal of Gender and the
Law, 5 Geo. J. Gender & L. 207, Spring 2004, l/n, accessed 6-21-14]
It is in these different ideas and policy initiatives where one sees the divergent goals and theories underlying groups such as
WHISPER and COYOTE. Although WHISPER's two main legislative reform priorities, the creation of civil causes of action for
individuals coerced into prostitution and the elimination of "mistake of age" defenses, are supported by most prostitutes' rights
groups (including COYOTE), its other policy initiatives have sparked heated debate. n195 WHISPER, for
example, applauds and lobbies
for the imposition of harsher penalties against johns, while COYOTE fears that
these penalties will unduly endanger prostitutes by only keeping criminally inclined customers on the streets.
Similarly, WHISPER advocates stronger penalties for pimping, particularly laws making it a crime to live "off the earnings of
prostitution." n196 COYOTE, on the other hand, argues that many women choose prostitution precisely because of the financial
support it can give their children, parents, friends, etc. Although these laws are meant to protect against violent and coercive pimps,
their broad wording can make children or parents (i.e. any person deriving financial benefit from the commercial sex transaction) a
criminal. n197
OFF
The exploitation of the sex worker lies in how surplus value can be extracted from
her in a motion to further expel capitalism. Only by rereading class in the feminist
debate on prostitution can we resolve the root of the problem.
Beloso 12 (Brooke Meredith Beloso is Assistant Professor of Gender, Women and Sexuality Studies at Butler Univeristy. Her
general areas of interest are gender, sexuality, information and communications technology, critical race theory, transnational
feminisms, prefigurative politics, critical university studies, and neoliberalism. “Sex, Work, and the Feminist Erasure of Class”, Signs,
Vol. 38, No. 1 (Autumn 2012), pp. 47-70, The University of Chicago Press, accessed via JSTOR )
Inviting class into the feminist debate on prostitution In the interest of beginning to reckon with what we have lost in the translation of
class from a theory of privilege and oppression into an identity analogous to gender and sexuality, I want to perform a bit of a
hermeneutic experiment: I want to see what comes into focus when we invite a Marxist theory of class into the feminist debate on
prostitution. To this end, I take up Rosemary Hennessy’s (2006) articulation of cultural oppression as a “second skin” that capital
uses against the worker in order to extract surplus value (profit) from him or her.12 Also to this end, I take up Crenshaw’s aforeme
tioned concept of intersectionality as an important tool with which we may more accurately identify the myriad forms of cultural
privilege and oppres- sion both before and beyond gender—the various second skins that laboring bodies freely (at least, in the
formal sense) offer up to capital in the marketplace—upon which economic exploitation is predicated. In so doing we see that the
rhetoric of, alternately (and for many interchangeably) prostitution as the measure of woman and woman as
the measure of prostitution (e.g., Giobbe 1990) leaves largely unexamined not only the mode of
production predicated upon the mass exploitation of labor in the interest of profit (capital accumulation) but
also the participation of feminism itself in the “microphysics of power” (Foucault 1995, 139) that constitute
the macropolitical oppression and exploitation of people in the sex industry. Parsing sex work as the metamorphosis of the
commodity through an intersectional second skin, we see that the plight of the prostitute—when, in fact, there is a plight
(more on this below)—often
lies not in her womanliness, per se, but rather in the degree to which her
impoverishment, her gender, her race, her sexuality, her age, her religion, her legal status, her
looks, or her ability (mental and physical) can be used against her in the extraction of surplus value
(profit) from her labor.13 And the question of whether these can be used against the sex worker has little to do with the
presence or absence of formal freedom between any given sex worker and her clients. Rather, the exploitation of the sex
worker hinges upon any number of structural second skins of cultural oppression (such as patriarchy,
white supremacy, heterosexism, ageism, religious chauvinism, nationalism, looksism, ableism, and so on) that both allow
capitalists to slap a particular wage on a particular service provided by a particular body and
establish that wage and its working conditions not in accordance with the principle “from each according to his
ability; to each according to his need” (Marx [1875] 2010, 347) but rather in relation to other forms of labor available for sale and
purchase at a particular moment in time. Much like Chandra Talpade Mohanty’s Western feminist who misses the veil as a marker
of agency when she wears only her imperialist, oppression- seeking glasses (1991, 346–67), the feminist who sees only victims
everywhere she or he looks at prostitution misses entirely the ingenuity and agency of the human being who chooses to work in the
sex industry rather than, say the sweatshop industry (or even, for that matter, the knowledge industry; see Anonymous, Ph.D. 1999),
because the wages and working conditions are, to his or her mind, better. According to the prevalent feminist logic of prostitution as
the measure of woman, Ashley Dupré is a better canary in the coal mine of gender inequality than Chun Yu Wang, and Eliot Spitzer
is a better fit for the role of canary-killing cat than, say, Jack Abramoff.14 Hence, too, the often uncritical feminist embrace of a figure
like New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, who rants and rages against the exploitation of female prostitutes halfway across
the globe, even as he sings the praises of sweatshops. The faulty logic at work here—that closing sweat- shops forces people into
prostitution—not only problematically relies upon Kristof’s own moralizing determination that the sex industry unilaterally offers
comparatively worse wages and working conditions than the sweat- shop industry but also, incredibly, offers sweatshops as a
solution to the problem of poverty driving many to work in any number of different capac- ities for very low wages in terrible
conditions.15 Conversely, woman as the measure of prostitution misses entirely the exploitation that men can experience in the sex
industry, not because they are women but because they are men, impoverished, gender nonconforming, of color, or gay, or young,
or undocumented, or criminalized, non-English speaking, conventionally “ugly,” or living with physical or mental disabilities, and so
on.16 Woman as the measure of prostitution misses, too, the exploitation that transpeople can experience in the sex industry, not
because they are women but because they are trans, impoverished, of color, gay, young, undocumented or criminalized, nonEnglish speaking, conventionally “ugly,” living with physical or mental disabilities, and so on (see Ryan 2006). But lest the
intersectionalization of some sex-working subjects’ oppression and exploitation inadvertently reinforce blanket stereotypes
associated with the plight of the prostitute, I want to shift the focus of attention to the privilege—the agency—
that also becomes visible when we invite class into the feminist debate on prostitution. For, once
having grasped class as a theory of privilege and oppression, one begins to see that both within and beyond the sex industry some
women are more equal than others (to paraphrase George Orwell). Taking seriously both privilege as the flip side of the coin of
oppression and the complex intersections of these two along any number of axes of cultural privilege and oppression that Crenshaw
privilege along one axis can
mitigate oppression along another, even within the sex industry itself. As Siobhan Brooks (quoted in
Soldano 2010) succinctly puts it, “Not everybody can sell their sex equally.”17 Taking seriously both privilege as a
and others in her wake have theorized as constitutive of intersectionality, we see that
mitigator of oppression and class as a dynamic, rather than reified, relation between labor and capital, we also see that the selfsame
person may be today’s woman-as-laborer, selling sex as “the particular product of [her] individual labor,” and tomorrow’s woman-ascapitalist, buying and selling sex as “the particular product[s] of [other] individual[s’] labor”—and vice versa (Marx [1861–63] 1969,
509). One might think here of former nude model and stripper Danni Ashe, aka “the billion download woman,” who is now an
Internet entrepreneur overseeing a “stable” of more than one hundred women and reportedly grossing more than $300,000 in
monthly revenue (Russell 1998), and former stripper and “queen of porn” Jenna Jameson, who recently sold the highly profitable
Internet pornography company she created in 2000 to Playboy Enterprises. Moreover, as Angela Davis (1983, 17) has observed,
intimate labor of all sorts has throughout history served for many women as an exploitative
means to a liberatory end.18 Last but not least, through the lens of class analysis one begins to see the
mutually imbricated privilege and oppression structuring what Laura Agus- tín has recently theorized as “the
rescue industry” (2007) and Jo Doezema describes as “Western feminists’ ‘wounded attachment’ to the ‘third
world prostitute’” (2001), whereby a radical abolitionist feminist such as Donna Hughes makes an excellent living as an
endowed women’s studies program chair with her research funded by the State Department, while the women and men employed in
the massage parlors she helped shut down in Rhode Island (a state with one of the highest unemployment rates in the nation)
endure forcible unemployment, detainment, deportation, and incarcera- tion.19 In this vein, and in one of the English language’s
greater ironies, the “abolitionist” feminist seeking the aid of the police state (rather than, say, the welfare state)
in his or her fight against prostitution is frequently if unwittingly at cross-purposes with the prison
abolitionist feminist, who sees the criminalization of sex work as but one more poverty-to-prison
pipeline and the police themselves as no small source of oppression for sex workers. 20 One begins to
see here, too, the widely divergent relationships to labor and capital structuring the “will to empower” (Cruikshank 1999) of New York
Times columnists Bob Herbert, who tried to rescue an unnamed young woman selling sex on Atlanta’s Metropolitan Parkway in
2006, and Kristof, who has in recent years tried to rescue women selling sex in Cambodia. Selling the stories of these women as
“reality porn” (Debbie Nathan quoted in Broeske 2006), Herbert and Kristof participate in what Katha Pollitt recently described as “a
long tradition of privileged men rescuing individual prostitutes as a kind of whirlwind adventure” (2004). In so doing, they earn wages
for “the particular product of [their] individual labor” (Marx [1861– 63] 1969, 509–10) and a profit for the New York Times, but in the
wake of these stories, the women they seek to rescue merely return to what are, to their minds, the best wages and working
conditions available to them: sex work. Conclusion If we as feminists are to honor the central tenets of the
feminist standpoint epistemology that gave rise to women’s studies as the academic arm of feminism—that knowledge
production is never objective and must always be checked against dissenting perspectives—then we must check the
feminist debate on prostitution against the dissenting perspectives of the sex- working subjects
about whom so much has been and is being said. By taking sex workers’ choices and visions of liberation at least
as seriously as our own choices, we stand to realize that the exploitation endemic to some sex work is not just
something that happens to prostitutes; rather, it is part and parcel of everything that happens
under the sign of capitalism. Radical-feminism- cum-abolitionist-feminism has too long masked its disavowal and
dislocation of the economic exploitation endemic to capitalism as heteropatriarchy. Sex work has become one of
neoliberal feminism’s favorite scapegoats, whereby many of us can deny the reality that under the
current political economy, “what has been repressed, the idea of sin, is capital itself” (Ben- jamin
[1921] 1996, 289). To seek to save one’s soul by saving prostitutes is thus to imagine that, under capitalism, all
privilege is not purchased at the expense of another’s exploitation. It is to imagine that some of us are above the
law of capital and that capitalism is not an adversarial, zero sum system. Feminist and queer theory that
rolls right past or right over the intersectional, agentic subjectivity of sex workers is premised in the falsehood that
atonement—rather than “guilt pervasive”—is possible under capitalism (Benjamin [1921] 1996, 289). To proclaim that
prostitution harms all women, everywhere, is to cover over the harm that we all do every day, to varying degrees, as participants in
our political economy. To overlook our own complicity, as producers and consumers, in the pricing of
sexual services and the construction of cultural hierarchies that enable economic exploitation in
every labor sector is to refuse to flip the intersectional coin. Inasmuch as sex work functions as feminist and
queer theory’s imaginary outside, whoromyopia is in no small part a means of preserving the fantasy of an imaginary outside to
capitalism—the fantasy that some of us living under capitalism have ingeniously managed to finagle a way of not selling out.21 It is
to trade the farsighted feminist project of expanding the range of meaningful choices available to human beings for the shortsighted
project of taking one choice away from them—whether by evacuating the choice to work in the sex industry of all meaning by
dismissing it as false consciousness, or by so criminalizing this choice that to make it is to find oneself squashed beneath the iron
heel of the prison industrial complex. Whoromyopia is thus also predicated upon the fantasy that some of us have somehow
managed to get a special purchase on a true consciousness about sex work (miraculously uninflected by our own relations to the
means of production), while others of us have, sadly, fallen prey to false consciousness about sex work. To correct for
whoromyopia is to give the lie to the notion that equality—including but not limited to gender and sexual
equality—is possible under capitalism. And if we truly want to be more than “merely cultural” (Butler 1997)—if we are
to seize heteronormativity by the roots rather than by its offshoots—then we must challenge the political
economy that has taken and continues to take advantage of anything it can, including feminism, in
order to take advantage of millions. We must find a way to recontextualize the various second skins that, for so many of
us, capital turns against us into instruments of our own exploitation. We must, instead, turn these second skins into
instruments of solidarity with all workers under capitalism, including sex workers. Failing this, we
may rest assured that capital will proceed unchecked in the appropriation of gender and sexual
oppression—and any number of other forms of cultural oppression it can appropriate—to both further entrench and mask the
direct correspondence between those who enjoy the freedom to choose their own relationship to the sexual body as a means of
production and those who enjoy freedom from want (an infinitesimal percent of the global population at best) and to have us fall for
the ruse that desire could somehow ever be autonomous from need. Together, we can do better than this. The time has come
to radically reread class into the feminist debate on prostitution and to reckon with all that we—
“whores, housewives, and others” (among others)—have lost in translation.
Vote Negative to validate and adopt the method of historical materialism that is
the 1NC
Marxist method can solve the case but not vice versa
Tumino (Prof. English @ Pitt) 01
[Stephen, “What is Orthodox Marxism and Why it Matters Now More than Ever”, Red Critiqu]
Any effective
political theory will have to do at least two things: it will have to offer an
integrated understanding of social practices and, based on such an interrelated
knowledge, offer a guideline for praxis. My main argument here is that among all
contesting social theories now, only Orthodox Marxism has been able to produce an
integrated knowledge of the existing social totality and provide lines of praxis that will
lead to building a society free from necessity. But first I must clarify what I mean by Orthodox Marxism. Like all other modes
and forms of political theory, the very theoretical identity of Orthodox Marxism is itself contested—not just from non-and anti-Marxists who question the very
"real" (by which they mean the "practical" as under free-market criteria) existence of any kind of Marxism now but, perhaps more tellingly, from within the
Marxist tradition itself. I will, therefore, first say what I regard to be the distinguishing marks of Orthodox Marxism and then outline a short polemical map of
contestation over Orthodox Marxism within the Marxist theories now. I will end by arguing for its effectivity in bringing about a new society based not on human
that to know contemporary society—and to be able to act on
such knowledge—one has to first of all know what makes the existing social totality. I will
argue that the dominant social totality is based on inequality—not just inequality of power
but inequality of economic access (which then determines access to health care, education, housing, diet,
transportation, . . . ). This systematic inequality cannot be explained by gender, race, sexuality,
disability, ethnicity, or nationality. These are all secondary contradictions and are all
determined by the fundamental contradiction of capitalism which is inscribed in the relation of
capital and labor. All modes of Marxism now explain social inequalities primarily on the basis
of these secondary contradictions and in doing so—and this is my main argument—
legitimate capitalism. Why? Because such arguments authorize capitalism without
gender, race, discrimination and thus accept economic inequality as an integral part of
human societies. They accept a sunny capitalism—a capitalism beyond capitalism. Such
a society, based on cultural equality but economic inequality, has always been the notso-hidden agenda of the bourgeois left—whether it has been called "new left," "postmarxism," or "radical
rights but on freedom from necessity. I will argue
democracy." This is, by the way, the main reason for its popularity in the culture industry—from the academy (Jameson, Harvey, Haraway, Butler,. . . ) to
For all, capitalism is here to stay and the best
that can be done is to make its cruelties more tolerable, more humane. This humanization (not
daily politics (Michael Harrington, Ralph Nader, Jesse Jackson,. . . ) to. . . .
eradication) of capitalism is the sole goal of ALL contemporary lefts (marxism, feminism, anti-racism, queeries, . . . ).
Such an understanding of social inequality is based on the fundamental understanding
that the source of wealth is human knowledge and not human labor. That is, wealth is
produced by the human mind and is thus free from the actual objective conditions that shape the
historical relations of labor and capital. Only Orthodox Marxism recognizes the
historicity of labor and its primacy as the source of all human wealth. In this paper I
argue that any emancipatory theory has to be founded on recognition of the priority of
Marx's labor theory of value and not repeat the technological determinism of corporate
theory ("knowledge work") that masquerades as social theory.
OFF
The United States Federal Government should decriminalize the act of performing
sexual activity for hire in the United States. The United States Federal
Government should criminalize the purchase of sex for hire in the United States.
Legalization increases government regulations that control bodies and
spursfurther trafficking and exploitation – decriminalization solves
Longworth 10 – U of Victoria Law
(Corinne, MALE VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN IN PROSTITUTION: WEIGHING FEMINIST LEGISLATIVE RESPONSES TO A
TROUBLING CANADIAN PHENOMENON, APPEAL VOLUME 15)
Prostitution has been legalized in the Netherlands and Victoria, Australia. In both juris- dictions, not all forms of prostitution are legal:
child prostitution, trafficking and some as- pects of street prostitution remain criminalized.100 Legalization often involves
removing criminal laws relating to adult prostitution and regulating
prostitution through licensing, health and
safety regulations.101 Although legalization has some benefits since it does not criminalize prostitutes and attempts to
support their well-being, it unfortunately has multiple drawbacks. In both jurisdictions, legalization has spurred a
marked growth in the sex industry.102 For example, in Victoria, legal brothels more than doubled over a span of 11 years: “the number of legitimate brothels grew from 40 in 1989 to 94 in 1999.”103 This growth of the sex in- dustry is linked directly to increased
demand, which stems from the legitimation and accessibility of prostitution domestically, and these countries’ increased
popularity as sex tourist destinations.¶ With an increase in demand, there has been an increase in the legal and
illegal, underground forms of the trade. 104 Demand must be met with a supply of bodies, and a
be made available for male sexual consumption. Thus, demand has resulted in an
increase in the exploitation of women and children who are trafficked or otherwise forced to enter
variety thereof, to
pros- titution. 105 In the Netherlands, there has been a disturbing increase in child sexual
exploitation , with a growth of 11,000 children in the sex trade since 1996, mainly trafficked from other
cannot say you’re fighting the trafficking of
people and at the same time legalise (brothels) because you open the market. ”107 This seems to be a
countries.106 As Anne-Marie Lizin of Belgium has stated, “You
sound argument since, in the Netherlands, approximately 80 to 85 percent of prostitutes are non-Dutch108 and thus have voluntarily
relocated or been trafficked from other countries to work in locations like Amsterdam. In this way, prostitution, trafficking and child
sexual exploitation should be viewed as inextricably linked. For these reasons, it is not surprising that the Mayor of Amsterdam
recently announced that a third of the red light dis- trict will be shut down since, not only did legalization not bring the Dutch
what they had “hoped and expected,” but it increased
organized crime, exploitation and trafficking.109¶ As well,
in jurisdictions with legalization, an increase in legal indoor prostitution has increased illegal street prostitution
rather than moving women in off the streets ,110 thus al- lowing the nuisance associated with prostitution to linger or
worsen. Of course, this
is not surprising since legalization does not ameliorate the basic conditions
of disadvantage that keep women— particularly the centred woman— poor, homeless and on the street to
begin with. Overall, legalizing prostitution has not decreased nuisance or exploitation, but has
largely exacerbated them.¶ Legalization has also failed to lessen the stigma and extreme violence
associated with prostitution. In Amsterdam, known internationally for its open-minded attitudes toward the sex
industry, legalization has not minimized the stigma attributed to prostitutes.111 Instead, as businesswomen, “ accountants,
banks and health insurance companies want nothing to do with [prostitutes].”112 This stigma may relate
to Radin’s recognition that many feel unease and disapprobation at a person commodifying their sexuality. Not surprisingly, just as
stigma remains, violence also still pervades and is a recognized reality within the legalized sex
industry, even though indoors.113 As one brothel owner in Amsterdam stated, “[y]ou don’t want a pillow in your room. It’s a
murder weapon.”114 Some even suggest that violence has increased, particularly for those who work in the
illegal sectors and, thus, are still alienated from police protection .115 A further concern is that violence
has been legitimated and normalized as simply a “workplace hazard” that prostitutes must
accept and prepare for.116 In some locales, panic buttons are affixed in rooms and prostitutes are encouraged to un- dergo
hostage negotiation training.117 These precautions indicate that violence
remains a serious, alarming and
consistent risk.¶ Yet another drawback of legalization is that it has generally not empowered prostitutes to
get out of the sex trade if they wish nor enjoy better working conditions. In the Netherlands, only
four percent of prostitutes have registered with authorities118 to access the health and safety regulations,
pension benefits and employment rights available. Therefore, only a small proportion of prostitutes have bettered
their legal status in the system, and even then they are still subject to social stigma and violence.
The prostitutes in the Netherlands who refrain from the legalized regime do so for many reasons:
fear of the stigma and repercussions that would flow from being officially recognized as a
prostitute,119 ineligibility be- cause of age or illegal immigrant status,120 and unwillingness to declare a
commitment to work they view as temporary. Thus, even in jurisdictions where prostitution is
legalized, a large proportion of the sex trade still operates illegally and underground, unable to
benefit from the legalized regime in place. As well, most prostitutes have not been empowered to
“move indoors” and enjoy “better” working conditions or exit the trade since the same socio-economic
reasons that put them on the street remain.¶ For these many reasons, very few people suggested
legalization or regulation to the 2006 Standing Committee as an approach to adopt in Canada.121 Furthermore, both sides
of the feminist debate strongly discourage legalization. Clearly, the centred woman would largely not
benefit from legalization: she would be excluded from the legal regime as a street prostitute and
the stigma, violence and disadvantage that informs her life would likely not abate. ¶ D. Decriminalization¶
Instead of legalization, full-decriminalization feminists advocate “decriminalization” as separate from,
and more advantageous than, legalization. The jurisdiction that full-de- criminalization feminists usually refer to as a
success is New Zealand, which adopted a de- criminalized regime in 2003. Decriminalization in New Zealand is similar to
legalization in Victoria, Australia and the Netherlands in terms of enabling prostitutes to access better working
conditions via employment contracts, lessened stigma and better relations with law enforcement
officials. New Zealand differs from legalized regimes in that street pros- titution has been decriminalized and child sexual
exploitation has been more seriously criminalized. These are both commendable improvements over
legalization regimes. Also, there is less of a division between the il/legal sex trade for workers in terms of in/out-door
prostitution given the decriminalization of street prostitution. Yet, it is still illegal for im- migrants to be sex workers and access the
labour and employment benefits of legal work- ers. Despite the advantages of decriminalization over legalization and an optimistic
report from the New Zealand Prostitution Law Review Committee (the “Committee”), many problems still remain and “progress [has
been] slower tha[n] may have been hoped.”122
Regulation intensifies marginalization and stigma against prostitutes, and causes
a more violent market to form
Mgbako & Smith 10
(Chi Mgbako* and Laura A. Smith** 2010 *Clinical Associate Professor of Law, Fordham Law School; Director, Walter Leitner
International Human Rights Clinic; J.D. Harvard Law School
Fordham International Law Journal 33 Fordham Int'l L.J. 1178 April, 2010 (Lexis)
The main aim of government regulation of sex work is to control the excesses, abuses, disorders, and other
undesirable social and public health consequences associated with its operation. 204 Proponents of legalization
also contend that legalization reduces criminal activity associated with prostitution (e.g., organized crime, police and state
corruption, child prostitution, and sex trafficking); decreases the level of street prostitution and relocates prostitution to controlled
environments away from residential areas; provides regular health checks to women in licensed brothels; controls the spread of
STIs and HIV/AIDS; and protects sex workers from violence and coercive pimps. 205 Legalized regimes, however, face
practical obstacles. Many sex workers may not want to register because of the stigma associated
with prostitution or may be unable to register because of their illegal immigration status. 206
Legalized systems therefore may lead to two classes of sex workers - those who register and are
regulated by the state and an underground class of sex workers who do not register and remain
marginalized and vulnerable. Decriminalization is the legal regime most often embraced by prosex-worker advocates and stands against the legal control of people in prostitution.
Decriminalization is the removal of all laws relating to prostitution. 207 Decriminalization
addresses the negative impact that criminalization has on sex workers. For example, criminal
records for prostitution-related offenses reinforce the marginalization of sex workers, while
making it more difficult for workers in the sex industry to find alternative [*1209] employment. 208
This increased marginalization heightens sex workers' vulnerability to abuse and assault from
clients, pimps, and partners, who violate the rights of sex workers with impunity. 209 Sex workers'
illegal status acts as a barrier to reporting abuse and creates difficulties in accessing necessary
health and social services. 210 Decriminalization would safeguard the human rights of sex
workers, alleviate the social exclusion that people in prostitution endure, and improve sex
workers' health and working conditions. 211 The difference between legalization and
decriminalization lies in the means by which prostitution is "made legal." Legalization imposes
more state regulations to control prostitution, while decriminalization removes all laws that
criminalize prostitution. Those who support decriminalization over legalization argue that
legalization essentially exchanges one exploitative system for another. 212 Under a legalized
system, women work out of government-regulated brothels, which can leave sex workers with
little control over their work conditions and which can substitute abuse and exploitation by police
officers and pimps with rights violations by the state. 213 Both laws which legalize and regulate
prostitution and laws that criminalize prostitution target the sex worker. 214 Furthermore, the main
goal of regulationist policies, including legalization, is often to keep prostitutes isolated and
separate from the rest of society, which reinforces the stigma surrounding prostitution. 215
Dems Good: 1NC
Dems will hold the Senate now—most accurate models
Logiurato 9-17-14 (Brett, staff writer, "Meet The New Nate Silver" Business Insider) www.businessinsider.in/Meet-The-NewNate-Silver/articleshow/42727612.cms
In 2012, as President Barack Obama fell behind in pre-election polls but not in election statistician Nate Silver's odds, this phrase
quickly caught on: "Keep calm and trust Nate Silver!" This summer, Democrats have a new election guru to turn to
for comfort: Sam
Wang, a neuroscientist and professor at Princeton University who runs a model at
Princeton's Election Consortium. Most of the 2014 election models - from The Washington Post, The New
York Times, and from Silver, among others - have for a while projected Republicans not only furthering their grip on
control of the House of Representatives, but also having a good chance of flipping Senate control as well. But
Wang's model has been the most bullish for Democrats. His model has two forecasts: If the
election were held today, Democrats would have an 80% chance of retaining control of the Senate.
Predicting for Election Day, he estimates slightly less bullish 70% odds. He predicts that as of
today, Senate Democrats and Independents that caucus with the party will make up 50 seats in the
chamber, enabling them to keep control by the thinnest of margins. (In such a 50-50 situation, Vice President Joe Biden would
cast the theoretical deciding vote.) On Tuesday, other models began shifting toward a better chance for
Democratic control of the Senate. The Washington Post on Tuesday put Democrats' odds at 51%.
The New York Times' new "Leo" model has control of the Senate at a 50-50 tossup. And Silver's site,
FiveThirtyEight, has Republicans' chances slimming to about 53%. "My model is slightly more favorable
because it relies on current polling conditions" as its main factor, Wang said in a recent interview with
Business Insider. The differences between their models - and their differing predictions - has opened up a pseudo-rivalry between
Wang and Silver in the lead-up to the midterm elections. During an interview with WNYC's Brian Lehrer last week, Silver claimed
Wang's model uses "arbitrary assumptions," something Wang rejected as an "out-and-out falsehood." In a blog post on Tuesday,
Wang playfully responded to a comment from Silver in which he said he'd like to "place a large
wager against" Wang. He called Silver's forecast that day, which gave Republicans a 64% chance of swinging
Senate control, into question, saying the "special sauce" (or formula) Silver uses for his model is
"messy stuff." But the difference between Wang and Silver, Wang says, is substantive. It is
predicated on the divide between the models - Wang's relies only on a reading of the latest polls,
while Silver's model adds in the "fundamentals" of the race when making predictions. Those
fundamentals vary by state. They can take into account fundraising, the liberal-conservative ideology of individual
candidates, and national factors like presidential approval rating and the history of the president's party performing badly in the sixth
year of his presidency, for example. "When he started in 2008, he brought lively commentary and the
addition of econometric assumptions to predict the future," Wang told Business Insider of Silver.
"He made the hobby fun for people to read about. All horse race commentators owe him a debt.
"The difference between us is substantive. In most years, adding assumptions doesn't alter the
picture too much: 2008, 2010, and 2012 were not hard prediction problems. However, this year's
Senate race is as close as 2004, and giving an accurate picture of the race is challenging. Adding
assumptions can bias an analyst's interpretation ." Nate Silver's model relies on more than just
polls. Somewhat similar to Silver, Wang's interest in political prognostication grew out of the insatiable need to fuel what had
been a hobby. He is the son of Taiwanese immigrants, grew up in California, graduated with a B.S. from the California Institute of
Technology by the age of 19, and subsequently graduated with a PhD from Stanford. He began his model in 2004, when
he was intensely following the presidential campaign that pitted President George W. Bush
against Democrat John Kerry. In the constant horse-race mentality and the over-reporting on
single polls, he said, he saw an opportunity to contribute a new, more comprehensive and
accurate element to the conversation. "I was motivated by the extreme closeness of the Kerry-Bush contest, and the
news stories about single polls were driving me crazy," Wang told Business Insider. "I thought a simple way to summarize all the
polls at once would improve the quality of coverage." Since then, his
model has nearly nailed the result in every
national election . In 2004, the model predicted Bush would grab 286 electoral votes to Kerry's
252. That was off by only a single electoral vote. (He made a personal prediction that turned out to be wrong.) The
2008 presidential election was similar - off by a single vote in each direction. The model only missed
Nevada's Senate race in 2010, a race in which nearly every poll was off the mark. And the model in 2012 correctly
predicted the vote in 49 of 50 states, the popular vote count of 51.1% to 48.9%, and 10 out of 10
tight Senate races - including Montana and South Dakota, which Silver missed. To Wang, it proves
that a model that solely focuses on polls is a reliable indicator of eventual electoral outcomes. And
he thinks models based on "fundamentals" like Silver's and like The New York Times' new model,
dubbed "Leo," significantly alter the picture this year . "As of early September, both the New York Times's model
'Leo' and the FiveThirtyEight model exert a pull equivalent to adjusting Senate polls in key races by several percentage points. In
other words, Republican candidates have slightly underperformed analyst expectations," Wang said. And this year, that could mean
the expected Republican "wave" might never materialize. Wang sees Democratic candidates
outperforming expectations all over the map.
Plan hurts the Democrats—majority opposes legalization
YouGov, staff, “68% Favor Legalized Gambling, 39% Would Legalize Prostitution,” 8—25—11,
http://today.yougov.com/news/2011/08/25/68-favor-legalized-gambling-39-would-legalize-pros/, accessed 9-4-14.
Americans have very different views about legalizing prostitution. 52% oppose that. And
support differs from one group to the next. Those under 30 are divided about the prospect ; those 65
But
and older are overwhelmingly opposed. Men are more favorable to legalizing prostitution than women are; college graduates more
positive than those with less education. And while 49% of independents and 42% of Democrats would legalize prostitution, only 26%
of Republicans agree.
Voters will hold them accountable—voters react to political stances
Stephen Ansolabehere, Professor, Government, Harvard and Philip Edward Jones, Assistant Professor, Political Science and
International Relations, University of Delaware, “Constituents’ Responses to Congressional Roll-Call Voting,” AMERICAN
JOURNAL OF POLTIICAL SCIENCE v. 54 n. 3, 7—10, pp. 583-597.
constituents have the capacity to and do in fact hold their members of
Congress accountable for roll-call votes. When people are asked about specific roll-call votes, they express definite
The central conclusion of our analysis is that
preferences on the matters at hand; further, most harbor beliefs about how their member of Congress voted. In addition, the
extent to which a constituent agrees with the policy positions of the member of Congress strongly
affects the constituent’s approval rating of the member and likelihood of voting for the member. That
conclusion is strengthened in instrumental variables estimates that correct for possible measurement error and simultaneity biases.
Citizens do not, of course, pay attention to every roll-call vote, and not every citizen is attentive, but the instrumental variables
estimates reveal that actual roll- call votes directly affect constituents’ beliefs, and those roll-call votes, in turn, have substantial
effects on approval ratings and electoral behavior. We are agnostic about how people learn about the voting behavior of
their members of Congress. We suspect it is based partly on facts learned from the media and campaigns and partly
on inferences, but it is more than just guessing or partisan projections. The two stages of our analysis reveal that constituents
respond directly to their Representatives’ roll-call voting behavior. This conclusion is the starting point for most contemporary
theorizing about Congress, especially spatial theories of politics. But, this has been a surprisingly elusive conjecture to establish
empirically. At least since Miller and Stokes’s (1963) seminal work on this topic, the dominant view has held that constituents don’t
have prefer- ences on the matters considered by Congress, they don’t have clear opinions about how their legislators act on such
the link
does exist; it is quite strong; and it creates the conditions for electoral accountability. Why
questions, and they don’t hold their members of Congress accountable on important subjects. This study reveals that
does our account differ from prior survey re- search, especially Miller and Stokes’s classic study? One possibility is the nature of the
times. Miller and Stokes asked about racial and foreign policies during the 1950s, a decade in which the politics of race and of
foreign trade became complicated and volatile. Voters may have been confused about where their Representatives stood on these
questions. We think the real answer lies with measurement. With the exception of isolated cases, surveys have not asked directly
about the roll-call votes of Representatives, even though that is the focus of much of the congressional research. Direct measure of
constituents’ preferences on salient roll calls and perceptions of their legislators’ behavior reveals that voters indeed harbor beliefs
about their legislators’ policy choices and hold the representatives’ accountable. Improved measurement, of which the methods here
are just one development, promises to clarify further the nature of substantive policy representation. Finally, there is the question of
aggregate accountability and congruence. Our results yield a picture strongly consistent in the aggregate with the reigning model of
representation. Constituents have preferences about the important matters of the day; they have beliefs, formed through whatever
means, about their representatives’ policy decisions. In the aggregate, constituents’ beliefs are approximately right. That is, on
average, voters see their politicians as taking approximately the general overall position across a variety of roll-call votes as the
Representatives in fact did. And, as the regression analyses show, constituents
rely on perceived policy
agreement to hold legislators accountable. The electorate rewards those seen to be in agreement with
their views, and they punish those seen to be out of step.
GOP Senate will reverse Obama’s climate change initiatives
Amy Harder, journalist, “Care About Energy and Environment Policy? Watch These Eight Races,” NATIONAL JOURNAL, 12—
31—13, www.nationaljournal.com/energy/care-about-energy-and-environment-policy-watch-these-eight-races-20131231, accessed
3-20-14.
For environmentalists, the 2014 midterm elections are about settling for the lesser of two evils. Several conservative Democrats up
for reelection in red states are facing tough competition, and if enough of these members lose, the Senate could flip to
Republican control. That would be the worst outcome for environmentalists, who need a
Democrat-controlled Senate to defend against efforts to undo President Obama's climate-change
agenda and other tough environmental policies. For the fossil-fuel industries, it's more of a mixed bag. Many major energy
companies are backing conservative—and influential—Democrats who champion their cause. But at the same time, this industry
also generally supports the Republican quest to take back control of the Senate. When it comes to how the Senate's handling of
energy and environment issues could change in 2015, the trio of vulnerable incumbent Democrats to watch the closest include
Sens. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, Mark Begich of Alaska, and Mark Pryor of Arkansas. Here's a roundup of those races and others
you should watch.
Ensures warming—global deal, economic/culture shift
Matt Hoffman and Steven Bernstein, Political Science, University of Toronto, “The Real Reason Obama’s Climate Plan Could
Change the Game,” GLOBE AND MAIL, 6—5—14, www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/the-real-reason-obamas-climate-plancould-change-the-game/article18997712/, accessed 8-26-14.
The regulations
can be a tipping point if they produce new coalitions for action on climate change
and are attentive to the interests of those negatively affected by the transition away from fossil fuels. More broadly, these
regulations can contribute to developing decarbonization pathways by shifting the U.S. political
debate to look more like Europe’s, where the question is how, not whether, to act on climate change.
The critical juncture for such a shift already occurred when the Obama administration moved to treat carbon dioxide like other
harmful substances regulated by the EPA. But this is the pathway’s first real test. If the regulation survives legal and
the entrenchment and institutionalization of this understanding in national
regulation is the real game changer . This focus on the instruments of policy – how fast and in what ways – as opposed
legislative challenges,
to debating abstract future goals to cut emissions also distances the U.S. from Canada, where the debate is still over whether to
decarbonize. It’s thus no surprise U.S. ambassador to Canada Bruce Heyman publically urged Canada to take more aggressive
action on climate change the very same day President Obama announced the new regulations, recognizing that the oil sands and
the controversial Keystone XL pipeline are the next stops along this policy pathway if the U.S. is to re-take leadership on climate
change internationally. Social science research tells us that when a policy goal starts to become taken for granted, following this
pattern, it can have far-reaching effects. Normalization of climate policy leaves opponents fighting a
rearguard action because it changes the commonsense around an issue. It also provides a long-term signal that could change
how major players think about where to move capital and investments –towards renewables and energy efficiency. Once cities,
states, and corporations begin to work towards the emissions targets in the proposed regulations, their
orientation towards energy and climate may significantly change and they may take up different practices in
multiple areas (transportation, buildings, urban development). The combination of aggressive targets in a particular
sector and flexibility mechanisms that encourage a diverse range of action in multiple sectors have the potential to
produce ripple effects that put the U.S. on a different trajectory, away from fossil fuels. Those
catalytic effects could also extend to the moribund international negotiations where a major
sticking point for the last 20 years has been complaints from developing countries that the U.S. has done too
little to address climate change. These proposed regulations will nudge the U.S. closer to the ‘leader’
category in the global response to climate change (or at least further from the laggard label that has dogged the U.S. for years)
perhaps making a global deal more palatable and realizable. The carbon pathway has been locked in for over a
hundred years, which has created strong coalitions of entrenched interests to support it. The battle is not so much over this
about its ability to create new coalitions and entrench interests that further
institutionalize and normalize the national and international policy pathways towards
decarbonization.
single initiative, as
Warming is real, human caused, and causes extinction—acting now is key to
avoid catastrophic collapse
Dr. David McCoy et al., MD, Centre for International Health and Development, University College London, “Climate Change and
Human Survival,” BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL v. 348, 4—2—14, doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g2510, accessed 8-31-14.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has just published its report on the impacts of global warming. Building on
its recent update of the physical science of global warming [1], the
IPCC’s new report should leave the world in no
doubt about the scale and immediacy of the threat to human survival , health, and well-being. The IPCC
has already concluded that it
is “ virtually certain that human influence has warmed the global climate
system” and that it is “ extremely likely that more than half of the observed increase in global average
surface temperature from 1951 to 2010” is anthropogenic [1]. Its new report outlines the future threats of
further global warming: increased scarcity of food and fresh water; extreme weather events; rise in sea
level; loss of biodiversity; areas becoming uninhabitable; and mass human migration, conflict and
violence. Leaked drafts talk of hundreds of millions displaced in a little over 80 years. This month, the American Association for
the Advancement of Science (AAAS) added its voice: “the well being of people of all nations [is] at risk.” [2] Such
comments reaffirm the conclusions of the Lancet/UCL Commission: that climate change is “the greatest threat to
human health of the 21st century.” [3] The changes seen so far—massive arctic ice loss and extreme weather events, for
example—have resulted from an estimated average temperature rise of 0.89°C since 1901. Further changes will depend
on how much we continue to heat the planet. The release of just another 275 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide would
probably commit us to a temperature rise of at least 2°C—an amount that could be emitted in less than eight years. [4]
“ Business
as usual ” will increase carbon dioxide concentrations from the current level of 400 parts per
million (ppm), which is a 40% increase from 280 ppm 150 years ago, to 936 ppm by 2100, with a 50:50 chance that this will deliver
global mean temperature rises of more than 4°C. It is now widely understood that such a rise is “incompatible with an organised
global community.” [5]. The
IPCC warns of “ tipping points ” in the Earth’s system, which, if crossed, could lead
to a catastrophic collapse of interlinked human and natural systems. The AAAS concludes that there is
now a “real chance of abrupt, unpredictable and potentially irreversible changes with highly
damaging impacts on people around the globe.” [2] And this week a report from the World Meteorological Office (WMO)
confirmed that extreme weather events are accelerating. WMO secretary general Michel Jarraud said, “There is no standstill in
global warming . . . The laws of physics are non-negotiable.” [6]
Warming disproportionately affects developing countries
Carrington 11 – Head of the environment at The Guardian (Damian, “Map reveals stark divide in who
caused climate change and who's being hit”, http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/damian-carringtonblog/2011/oct/26/climate-change-developing-country-impacts-risk?CMP=twt_gu, October 26th, 2011,
KTOP)
When the world's nations convene in Durban in November in the latest attempt to inch towards a global deal to tackle
climate change, one fundamental principle will, as ever, underlie the negotiations. Is the contention that while rich,
industrialized nations caused climate change through past carbon emissions, it is the
developing world that is bearing the brunt. It follows from that, developing nations say, that the
rich nations must therefore pay to enable the developing nations to both develop cleanly and
adapt to the impacts of global warming. The point is starkly illustrated in a new map of climate vulnerability
(ommitted): the rich global north has low vulnerability; the poor global south has high
vulnerability. The map is produced by risk analysts Maplecroft by combining measures of the risk of climate change
impacts, such as storms, floods, and droughts, with the social and financial ability of both communities and
governments to cope. The top three most vulnerable nations reflect all these factors: Haiti, Bangladesh, Zimbabwe. But
it is not until you go all the way down 103 on the list, out of 193 nations, that you encounter
the first major developed nation: Greece. The first 102 nations are all developing ones. Italy is next, at
124, and like Greece ranks relatively highly due to the risk of drought. The UK is at 178 and the country on
Earth least vulnerable to climate change, according to Maplecroft, is Iceland. " Large areas of north America
and northern Europe are not so exposed to actual climate risk, and are very well placed to deal
with it," explains Charlie Beldon, principal analyst at Maplecroft. The vulnerability index has been
calculated down to a resolution of 25km2 and Beldon says at this scale the vulnerability of the
developing world's fast growing cities becomes clear. "A lot of big cities have developed in
exposed areas such as flood plains, such as in south east Asia, and in developing economies they so
don't have the capacity to adapt." Of the world's 20 fastest growing cities, six are classified as
'extreme risk' by Maplecroft, including Calcutta in India, Manila in the Philippines, Jakarta in Indonesia and Dhaka
and Chittagong in Bangladesh. Addis Ababa in Ethiopia also features . A further 10 are rated as 'high risk'
including Guangdong, Mumbai, Delhi, Chennai, Karachi and Lagos. "Cities such as Manila, Jakarta and
Calcutta are vital centres of economic growth in key emerging markets, but heat waves,
flooding, water shortages and increasingly severe and frequent storm events may well
increase as climate changes takes hold," says Beldon.
Case: Trafficking
They don’t solve – don’t increase targeting of sex purchasers – no ev, that was
cross-x
Legalization causes trafficking, doesn’t solve support
Sabasteanski 14 (Nika, staff writer, John Hopkins University Newsletter, 1/30/14, "US should emulate Sweden, not
Germany, on prostitution decriminalization", http://www.jhunewsletter.com/2014/01/30/us-should-emulate-sweden-not-germany-onprostitution-decriminalization-27360 )
¶ This all sounds well and good, but the fact remains that out of the 400,000 female and male prostitutes in
Germany, only 44 are signed up to receive the health and welfare benefits provided. An article published in
Spiegel comments, “In Hamburg, with its famous Reeperbahn red-light district, only 153 women are in compliance with regulations
and have registered with the city’s tax office.” A report done by the German Federal Ministry for Family Affairs, Senior
found
that most women were not signed up to receive their social security benefits and employment
contracts were used only by 1 percent of the women, because “the prostitutes did not consider it a
financially attractive option.Ӧ Additionally, there were few cases where a prostitute brought a client to German court to
sue for fair pay. The same report also found that brothels were kept at substandard conditions and repeatedly
stated that there had not been enough effort to reach the government’s goal of providing an exit strategy from
prostitution. Perhaps the worst unintended consequence of legalization has been the significant
Citizens, Women and Youth in 2007, reflecting on the social benefits provided to prostitutes in a 2002 piece of legislation,
increase in sex trafficking in these areas . While police presence would seem like a positive regulatory
frightened the women, mostly brought in illegally and underground from Eastern Europe, and
made it difficult to expose trafficking rings, including those exploiting children. A study done by Axel Dreher
of the University of Heidelberg et al., published a year ago, concluded after analyzing statistics from 150
countries, “On average, countries where prostitution is legal experience larger reported human
mechanism, instead it has
trafficking inflows.” The overall aim of legalization of prostitution was to protect the women, but this observation shows how
pimps and traffickers instead exploited the attitude of lenience. The same study concluded that based on the two established and
competing economic models in this field, the scale effect prevailed:
The legalization of prostitution resulted in an
overall increase in trafficking as the supply in the industry rose to balance with demand . The
authors did note that there is an opposing force called the substitution effect, which relies on the fear of prosecution if trafficked
women are used in legal brothels, but their data show this effect is generally dominated by the scale effect. ¶
Legalization increases violence against women
IT ‘08
(The Irish Times citing Cari Mitchell a spokeswoman for the English Collective of Prostitutes (ECP), a network of women working in
different areas of the sex industry “Should the laws against prostitution be abolished?” February 11, 2008 Monday, Lexis, TSW)
Cari Mitchell is writing on behalf of the English Collective of Prostitutes NO: Legalising prostitution
does not protect those involved but rather acts to expand the sex industry and normalise the
exploitation of women. This has been proven in other jurisdictions such as the Netherlands. A woman seldom finds herself
legalising
the practice there is a failure to acknowledge that prostitution preys on particularly vulnerable
individuals. Women in prostitution suffer violence or the threat of violence on a regular basis.
Legalisation does not protect the women from violence, rape and murder, which are endemic in the sex industry and
involved in prostitution as a result of unlimited choices, but rather as a consequence of very constrained circumstances. Prostitution is a survival strategy. By
are understood to be "occupational hazards". Women prostituted in legal brothels in Victoria, Australia are given guidelines that dictate how to negotiate with a violent customer.
In what other non-military profession is it necessary to handle hostage situations in a "normal" working day? No state has yet effectively regulated the sex industry. A woman
seldom finds herself involved in prostitution as a result of unlimited choices, but rather as a consequence of very constrained circumstances. Prostitution is a survival strategy.
By legalising the practice there is a failure to acknowledge that prostitution preys on particularly vulnerable individuals. The
Netherlands believed that legalising prostitution would end child prostitution, but instead it has seen a huge increase in numbers of child prostitutes. The same
phenomenon has occurred in Victoria, Australia. Legalised prostitution has contributed to an increase in
organised crime within the industry and this has led to an increase in violence against the
women.
Calculation is good, inevitable and ethical
Richard L. Revesz, Professor, Law, NYU and Michael A. Livermore, Executive Director, Institute for Policy Integrity, RETAKING
RATIONALITY: HOW COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS CAN BETTER PROTECT THE ENVIRONMENT AND OUR HEALTH, 2008, p. 14.
Governmental decisions are also fundamentally different from personal decisions in that they often
affect people in the aggregate. In our individual lives, we come into contact with at least some of the consequences of our
decisions. If we fail to consult a map, we pay the price: losing valuable time driving around in circles and listening to the complaints
of our passengers. We are constantly confronted with the consequences of the choices that we have made. Not so for governments,
however, which exercise authority by making decisions at a distance. Perhaps one of the most challenging aspects of governmental
decisions is that they require a special kind of compassion—one that can seem, at first glance, cold and calculating, the antithesis of
empathy. The aggregate and complex nature of governmental decisions does not address people as human beings, with concerns
and interests, families and emotional relationships, secrets and sorrows. Rather, people are numbers stacked in a column or points
on a graph, described not through their individual stories of triumph and despair, but by equations, functions, and dose-response
curves. The language of governmental decisionmaking can seem to —and to a certain extent does—ignore what
makes individuals unique and morally important. But, although the language of bureaucratic decisionmaking can be
dehumanizing, it is also a prerequisite for the kind of compassion that is needed in contemporary society. Elaine
Scarry has developed a comparison between individual compassion and statistical compassion.' Individual compassion is familiar—
when we see a person suffering, or hear the story of some terrible tragedy, we are moved to take action. Statistical compassion
seems foreign—we hear only a string of numbers but must comprehend "the concrete realities embedded there."' Individual
compassion derives from our social nature, and may be hardwired directly into the human brain.' Statistical compassion calls on us
to use our higher reasoning power to extend our natural compassion to the task of solving more abstract—but no less real—
problems. Because compassion is not just about making us feel better—which we could do as easily by forgetting about a problem
as by addressing it—we have a responsibility to make the best decisions that we can. This book argues that cost-benefit analysis,
properly conducted, can improve environmental and public health policy. Cost-benefit analysis—the translation of human
lives and acres of forest into the language of dollars and cents—can
seem harsh and impersonal. But such an
approach is also necessary to improve the quality of decisions that regulators make. Saving the most lives, and best
protecting the quality of our environment and our health—in short, exercising our compassion most effectively—requires us to
step back and use our best analytic tools. Sometimes, in order to save a life, we need to treat a person like a number. This is the
challenge of statistical compassion. This book is about making good decisions. It focuses on the area of environmental, health and
safety regulation. These regulations have been the source of numerous and hard-fought controversies over the past several
decades, particularly at the federal level. Reaching the right decisions in the areas of environmental protection, increasing safety,
and improving public health is clearly of high importance. Although it is admirable (and fashionable) for people to buy green or avoid
products made in sweatshops, efforts taken at the individual level are not enough to address the pressing problems we face—there
is a vital role for government in tackling these issues, and sound collective decisions concerning regulation are needed. There is a
temptation to rely on gut-level decisionmaking in order to avoid economic analysis, which, to many, is a foreign language on top of
seeming cold and unsympathetic. For government to make good decisions, however, it cannot abandon reasoned analysis.
Because of the complex nature of governmental decisions, we have no choice but to deploy complex analytic tools in order to make
the best choices possible.
Failing to use these tools, which amounts to abandoning our duties to one
another, is not a legitimate response. Rather, we must exercise statistical compassion by recognizing what
numbers of lives saved represent: living and breathing human beings, unique, with rich inner lives and an
interlocking web of emotional relationships. The acres of a forest can be tallied up in a chart, but that should not blind us to the
beauty of a single stand of trees. We need to use complex tools to make good decisions while simultaneously remembering that we
are not engaging in abstract exercises, but that we are having real effects on people and the environment. In our personal lives, it
would be unwise not to shop around for the best price when making a major purchase, or to fail to think through our options when
making a major life decision. It is equally foolish for government to fail to fully examine alternative policies when making regulatory
decisions with life-or-death consequences. This reality has been recognized by four successive presidential administrations. Since
1981, the cost-benefit analysis of major regulations has been required by presidential order. Over the past twenty-five years,
however, environmental and other progressive groups have declined to participate in the key governmental proceedings concerning
the cost-benefit analysis of federal regulations, instead preferring to criticize the technique from the outside. The resulting
asymmetry in political participation has had profound negative consequences, both for the state of federal regulation and for the
technique of cost-benefit analysis itself. Ironically, this state of affairs has left progressives open to the charge of rejecting reason,
when in fact strong environmental and public health pro-grams are often justified by cost-benefit analysis. It is time for progressive
groups, as well as ordinary citizens, to retake the high ground by embracing and reforming cost-benefit analysis. The difference
between being unthinking—failing to use the best tools to analyze policy—and unfeeling—making decisions without compassion—is
unimportant: Both lead to bad policy. Calamities can result from the failure to use either emotion or reason. Our
emotions provide us with the grounding for our principles, our innate interconnectedness, and our sense of obligation to others. We
use our powers of reason to build on that emotional foundation, and act effectively to bring about a better world.
Default to consequences—anything else is tautological and irrational
Joshua Greene, Associate Professor, Harvard University, “The Secret Joke of Kant’s Soul,” 20 10,
www.fed.cuhk.edu.hk/~lchang/material/Evolutionary/Developmental/Greene-KantSoul.pdf
What turn-of-the-millennium science is telling us is that human moral judgment is not a pristine rational enterprise,
that our moral judgments are driven by a hodgepodge of emotional dispositions, which themselves were shaped by a hodgepodge
of evolutionary forces, both biological and cultural. Because of this, it is exceedingly unlikely that there is any
rationally coherent normative moral theory that can accommodate our moral intuitions. Moreover, anyone who
claims to have such a theory, or even part of one, almost certainly doesn't. Instead, what that person probably has is a moral
rationalization. It seems then, that we have somehow crossed the infamous "is"-"ought" divide. How did this happen? Didn't Hume
(Hume, 1978) and Moore (Moore, 1966) warn us against trying to derive an "ought" from and "is?" How did we go from descriptive
scientific theories concerning moral psychology to skepticism about a whole class of normative moral theories? The answer is that
we did not, as Hume and Moore anticipated, attempt to derive an "ought" from and "is." That is, our method has been inductive
rather than deductive. We have inferred on the basis of the available evidence that the phenomenon of rationalist deontological
philosophy is best explained as a rationalization of evolved emotional intuition (Harman, 1977). Missing the Deontological Point I
suspect that rationalist deontologists will remain unmoved by the arguments presented here. Instead, I suspect, they will insist that I
have simply misunderstood whatKant and like-minded deontologists are all about. Deontology, they will say, isn't about this
is about taking
humanity seriously. Above all else, it's about respect for persons. It's about treating others as fellow rational creatures rather
intuition or that intuition. It's not defined by its normative differences with consequentialism. Rather, deontology
than as mere objects, about acting for reasons rational beings can share. And so on (Korsgaard, 1996a; Korsgaard, 1996b).This is,
no doubt, how many deontologists see deontology. But this insider's view, as I've suggested, may be misleading. The problem,
more specifically, is that it defines deontology in terms of values that are not distinctively deontological,
though they may appear to be from the inside. Consider the following analogy with religion. When one asks a religious person to
explain the essence of his religion, one often gets an answer like this: "It's about love, really. It's about looking out for other people,
looking beyond oneself. It's about community, being part of something larger than oneself." This sort of answer accurately captures
the phenomenology of many people's religion, but it's nevertheless inadequate for distinguishing religion from other things. This is
because many, if not most, non-religious people aspire to love deeply, look out for other people, avoid self-absorption, have a sense
of a community, and be connected to things larger than themselves. In other words, secular humanists and atheists can assent to
most of what many religious people think religion is all about. From a secular humanist's point of view, in contrast, what's distinctive
about religion is its commitment to the existence of supernatural entities as well as formal religious institutions and doctrines. And
they're right. These things really do distinguish religious from non-religious practices, though they may appear to be secondary to
many people operating from within a religious point of view. In the same way, I believe that most of the standard
deontological/Kantian self-characterizatons fail to distinguish deontology from other approaches to ethics. (See also Kagan (Kagan,
1997, pp. 70-78.) on the difficulty of defining deontology.) It seems to me that consequentialists, as much as anyone else, have
respect for persons, are against treating people as mere objects, wish to act for reasons that rational creatures can share, etc. A
consequentialist respects other persons, and refrains from treating them as mere objects, by
counting every person's well-being in the decision-making process. Likewise, a consequentialist attempts to act
according to reasons that rational creatures can share by acting according to principles that give equal
weight to everyone's interests, i.e. that are impartial. This is not to say that consequentialists and deontologists don't
differ. They do. It's just that the real differences may not be what deontologists often take them to be. What, then, distinguishes
deontology from other kinds of moral thought? A good strategy for answering this question is to start with concrete disagreements
between deontologists and others (such as consequentialists) and then work backward in search of deeper principles. This is what
I've attempted to do with the trolley and footbridge cases, and other instances in which deontologists and consequentialists
disagree. If you ask a deontologically-minded person why it's wrong to push someone in front of speeding trolley in
order to save five others, you will getcharacteristically deontological answers. Some will be tautological: "Because it's
murder!"Others will be more sophisticated: "The ends don't justify the means." "You have to respect people's rights." But, as we
know, these answers don't really explain anything, because if you give the same people (on different occasions) the trolley case or
the loop case (See above), they'll make the opposite judgment, even though their initial explanation concerning the footbridge case
applies equally well to one or both of these cases. Talk about rights, respect for persons, and reasons we can share are natural
attempts to explain, in "cognitive" terms, what we feel when we find ourselves having emotionally driven intuitions that are odds with
the cold calculus of consequentialism. Although these explanations are inevitably incomplete, there seems to be "something deeply
right" about them because they give voice to powerful moral emotions. But, as with many religious people's accounts of what's
essential to religion, they don't really explain what's distinctive about the philosophy in question.
Health 1NC
Legalization improving health is a myth—stigma and zoning mean this has never
been the case in a country with legalized sex work
Farley 4 (Melissa, University of Iowa (Ph.D., Counseling Psychology, 1973), San Francisco State University (MS, Clinical
Psychology, 1966), Mills College (BA, Psychology, 1964), Prostitution Research and Education 1996–present, Kaiser Foundation
Research Institute (Oakland, CA), 1993–2000, ‘“Bad for the Body, Bad for the Heart”: Prostitution Harms Women Even if Legalized
or Decriminalized’, Violence Against Women, Vol. 10 No. 10, October 2004, www.prostitutionresearch.com/FarleyVAW.pdf )
Advocates of decriminalization argue that the health of those in prostitution will be improved by
decriminalization because otherwise women will not have access to health care. It is assumed that women will
seek health care as soon as the stigma of arrest is removed from prostitution. If the stigma is removed,
advocates argue, women will then file a complaint whenever they are abused, raped, or assaulted in prostitution. They assume
that the complaint will be followed with a police response that treats women in prostitution with
dignity and as ordinary citizens. Unfortunately, health care workers and police too often share the
same contempt toward those in prostitution that others do.¶ A former prostitute in NZ said to the Parliament:
¶
“This bill pro- vides people like me . . . with some form of redress [italics added], for the brutalisation that may happen...when you’re
with a client and you have a knife pulled on you” (Georgina Beyer, speech, Wellington, NZ, June 26, 2003). The specific form of
redress offered by the NZ decriminalization law was not described by the speaker, nor is it articulated in the law. The dilemma for
the person in prostitution is not that there is no legal redress for coercion, physical assault, and rape in the new law or in old laws.
The dilemma is that in prostitution there is no avoiding sexual harassment, sexual exploitation,
rape, and acts that are the equivalent of torture.¶ Decriminalization in NZ was promoted as a means of providing
those in prostitution with legal redress against violent johns. However, prostituted women could already take legal
action under existing laws but rarely did so. Explaining this situation, a NZ Prostitutes Collective member stated,
“They don’t want to draw attention to themselves and what they’re doing” (Else, 2003, n.p.). Women in
the Netherlands have expressed similar sentiments, even though prostitution has been legal there for many¶
years. Their concern was the loss of anonymity that exists in legal prostitution . Once officially registered as
prostitutes, Dutch women feared that this designation would pursue them for the rest of their lives.
Despite the fact that if officially registered as prostitutes they would accrue pension funds, the women still preferred
anonymity (Schippers, 2002). They wanted to leave prostitution as quickly as possible with no legal record of having been in
prostitution (Daley, 2001). Similarly, despite attempts to unionize women in Germany’s $16.5 billion legal
prostitution industry, the women not only avoided unions, they avoided registering with the government
and they continued to engage in illegal prostitution in part because they felt that the remote areas
where prostitution is zoned put them at increased , not decreased, risk of physical danger (Taubitz, 2004).
HIV is decreasing now
Kelland 14 7/16 (Kate, contributor, Kate, Global AIDS epidemic can be controlled by 2030, U.N. says
<http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/07/16/us-health-hiv-unaids-idUSKBN0FL0RX20140716>, TF)
New HIV infections and deaths from AIDS are decreasing , the United Nations said on Wednesday, making it
possible to control the epidemic by 2030 and eventually end it " in every region, in every
country".¶ "More than ever before, there is hope that ending AIDS is possible. However, a business-as-usual
approach or simply sustaining the AIDS response at its current pace cannot end the epidemic," the U.N. AIDS program UNAIDS
said in a global report issued ahead of an AIDS conference in Melbourne, Australia next week. ¶ It said the number of people
infected with HIV was stabilizing at around 35 million worldwide. The epidemic had killed some 39 million of
the 78 million people it has affected since it began in the 1980s.¶ "The AIDS epidemic can be ended in every region,
every country, in every location, in every population and every community," Michel Sidibe, the director of
UNAIDS, said in the report. "There are multiple reasons why there is hope and conviction about this goal." ¶ The human
immunodeficiency virus (HIV) that causes AIDS can be transmitted via blood, breast milk and by semen during sex, but can be kept
in check with cocktails of drugs known as antiretroviral therapy or ART. ¶ UNAIDS said that at the end of 2013, some 12.9 million HIV
positive people had access to antiretroviral therapy - a dramatic improvement on the 10 million who were on treatment just one year
earlier and the only 5 million who were getting AIDS drugs in 2010.¶ Since 2001, new HIV infections have fallen by 38 percent, it
said. AIDS
deaths have fallen 35 percent since a peak in 2005.¶ "The world has witnessed extraordinary
changes in the AIDS landscape. There have been more achievements in the past five years than in the preceding 23 years," the
report said.¶ The U.N. report said ending the AIDS epidemic by 2030 would mean the spread of HIV was being
controlled or contained, and that the impact of the virus in societies and in people's lives had
been reduced by significant declines in ill health, stigma, deaths and the number of AIDS
orphans.¶ "It means increased life expectancy, unconditional acceptance of people's diversity and rights, and increased
productivity and reduced costs as the impact diminishes."¶ According to UNAIDS, $19.1 billion was available from all sources for the
AIDS response in 2013, and the estimated annual need by 2015 is currently between $22 billion and $24 billion. ¶ Sidibe said the
international community should seize the opportunity to turn the epidemic around. ¶ "We have a fragile five-year window to build on
the rapid results that been made," he said. "If we accelerate all HIV scale-up by 2020, we will be on track to end the
epidemic by 2030. If not, we risk significantly increasing the time it would take - adding a decade, if not more."¶ He said
controlling the epidemic by 2030 would avert 18 million new HIV infections and 11.2 million AIDS deaths between 2013 and 2030.¶
In 2011, U.N. member states agreed to a target of getting HIV treatment to 15 million people by 2015.
As countries scaled up treatment coverage, and evidence showed how treating HIV early also reduces its spread, the World Health
Organization (WHO) set new guidelines last year, expanding the number of people needing treatment by more than 10 million. ¶
Jennifer Cohn, medical director of the access campaign for the charity Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), said millions of HIV
positive people still do not get the drugs they needed.¶ "Providing life-saving HIV treatment to nearly 12 million people in the
developing world is a significant achievement, but more than half of people in need still do not have access," she said. "We know
that early treatment helps prevent transmission of HIV and keeps people healthy; we need to respond to HIV in all contexts and
make treatment accessible to everyone in need as soon as possible."
2NC
CP
legalization and decrim are distinct, legalization controls their lives
Prostitutes Education Network no date
(informational site about prostitution legalization, http://www.bayswan.org/defining.html)
Decriminalisation
Decriminalisation refers to the removal of all criminal laws relating to the operation of the sex
industry. The decriminalisation model aims to support occupational health and safety and workplace
issues through existing legal and workplace mechanisms.¶ Legalisation¶ Refers to the use of criminal
laws to regulate or control the sex industry by determining the legal conditions under which the sex
industry can operate. Legalisation can be highly regulatory or merely define the operation of the various sectors of the
sex industry. It can vary between rigid controls under legalised state controlled systems to privatising
the sex industry within a legally defined framework. It is often accompanied by strict criminal
penalties for sex industry businesses that operate outside the legal framework. ¶ Defining terms for
contemporary discussion¶ Although there have always been reformist efforts and movements concerning prostitution, the
prostitutes' rights movement, as we know it today, began in the late 60's and early 70's. The difference between the contemporary
prostitutes' movement and previous efforts is that the current movement has been defined in a large part by prostitutes themselves.
Prostitute activists have defined prostitutes' legal status in specific ways since the beginning of the prostitutes' rights movement. The
current movement includes a recognition of the rights of prostitutes to autonomy and self-regulation. ¶ Common definitions of
legalization¶ There is no official definition of legalized or decriminalized prostitution. Those who are not familiar with the
contemporary discussion about prostitution law reform usually use the term "legalization" to
mean any alternative to absolute criminalization, ranging from licensing of brothels to the lack of any laws about
prostitution. Most references to law reform in the media and in other contemporary contexts use the term "legalization" to refer to
any system that allows some prostitution. These common definitions of legalization are extremely broad.
Conflicting interpretations of this term often cause confusion in a discussion of reform. ¶ Many (or
most) societies that allow prostitution do so by giving the state control over the lives and businesses of those who work as
prostitutes. Legalization often includes special taxes for prostitutes, restricting prostitutes to working
in brothels or in certain zones, licenses, registration of prostitutes and government records of
individual prostitutes, and health checks which often means punitive quarantine . The term legalization
does not necessarily have to refer to the above sorts of regulations. In fact, in one commonly accepted definition of legalization,
legal can simply mean that prostitution is not against the law. ¶ Legalization¶ From sociological perspective, the term
legalization usually refers to a system of criminal regulation and government control of
prostitutes , wherein certain prostitutes are given licenses which permit them to work in specific and usually limited ways.
Although legalization can also imply a decriminalized, autonomous system of prostitution, in reality, in most "legalized" systems the
police are relegated the job of prostitution control through criminal codes. Laws regulate prostitutes businesses and
lives, prescribing health checks and registration of health status (enforced by police and, often
corrupt, medical agencies), telling prostitutes where they may or may not reside, prescribing full
time employment for their lovers, etc. Prostitute activists use the term legalization to refer to
systems of state control , which defines the term by the realities of the current situation, rather than by the broad
implications of the term itself.¶ Because of the range of definitions of legalization, it is difficult to use the
term in a discussion of reform. When the general public concerned with civil rights, privacy, etc., call for
"legalization," they may not be aware implications of that term, or of the problems inherent in
many legalized systems. ¶ Decriminalization¶ Prostitutes' rights organizations (ie, COYOTE, National Task
Force on Prostitution) use the term decriminalization to mean the removal of laws against prostitution.
Decriminalization is usually used to refer to total decriminalization, that is, the repeal of laws against consensual adult sexual
activity, in commercial and non-commercial contexts. (Prostitutes' rights organizations such as US PROS, English Collective of
Prostitutes prefer to refer to 'the abolition of laws against prostitutes'). Prostitutes' rights advocates call for decriminalization of all
aspects of prostitution resulting from individual decision. Asserting the right to work as a prostitutes, many claim
their right to freedom of choice of management. They claim that laws against pimping (living off the earnings) are
often used against domestic partners and children, and these laws serve to to prevent prostitutes from organizing their businesses
and working together for mutual protection. They call for the repeal of current laws that interfere with their
rights of freedom of travel and freedom of association . Civil rights and human rights advocates from a
variety of perspectives call for enforcement of laws against fraud, abuse, violence and coercion to
protect prostitutes from abusive, exploitative partners and management.
Legalization includes regulation- decriminalization does not- Swedish model does
decrim
Micah Schwartzbach No Date (Either 2013 or 2014), Micah Schwartzbach joined Nolo’s editorial staff in 2013. Before that
he was a criminal defense lawyer specializing in research and writing, first in Berkeley, then in Marin County. In 2008 he served as
co-counsel in the landmark acquittal of an organ transplant surgeon accused of attempting to accelerate a potential organ donor’s
death. (People v. Roozrokh, San Luis Obispo Superior Court Case No. F405885.) He writes and edits content across a range of
practice areas. He also authors Uncuffed: A Candid Take on Crime and Society, a blog that dissects the world of criminal law. Micah
earned his B.A. from the University of California, Davis, where he graduated with highest honors, and his J.D. from the University of
California, Hastings College of the Law, where he graduated cum laude. “Decriminalizing Prostitution“
http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/decriminalizing-prostitution.htm ac 8-18
Legalization vs. Decriminalization¶ Those who oppose the criminalization of prostitution typically
advocate one of two approaches : legalization (which involves regulation ) or decriminalization
( no regulation). Legalization is what Nevada practices: the direct regulation of prostitution by the
government . This regulation may include an array of methods, from zoning requirements and
advertising restrictions to mandatory tests for sexually transmitted diseases. (For more information on
Nevada's prostitution laws, see Prostitution, Pimping, and Pandering Laws in Nevada.) ¶ Decriminalization is the removal
of laws and regulation; under this model, prostitution is treated just like any other occupation.
Sweden takes a partial decriminalization approach, under which the sale of sex is not illegal, but its purchase is.
New Zealand, on the other hand, has decriminalized both the purchase and sale of sexual activity .
Critics of decriminalization point to studies regarding New Zealand’s sex trade that show that violence against sex workers has
persisted in that country.
Decriminalization solves the aff—permutation can’t solve because the regulations
of the aff are mutually exclusive
Oakford 14
Cartographer, Researcher at New Economy Project SEO Specialist / Contributor at BabyMed Cartographer and Researcher at
Cartography Lab, SUNY Binghamton, Samuel,“Want to Combat AIDS? Decriminalize Sex Work, Researchers Say,” July 24, 2014,
https://news.vice.com/article/want-to-combat-aids-decriminalize-sex-work-researchers-say)
Efforts to prevent HIV usually consist of proactive interventions — but when
it comes to sex workers, leaving them
alone may be the best prescription of all. A study presented by researchers at the 20th International AIDS Conference in
Melbourne this week determined that decriminalizing sex work would have “the greatest effect on the
course of HIV epidemics” across the world. Female sex workers in low- and middle-income countries are more than
13 times as likely to contract HIV than women outside the industry, and are at high risk of transmitting the
virus to others. In order to lower HIV rates worldwide, researchers at the conference argued, countries should
make improving the circumstances of sex workers a top priority. The study, which was published by the
British medical journal The Lancet as the first in a series partly funded by the United Nations Population Fund, found that
criminalization makes sex workers more likely to be beleaguered or abused by police and less
likely to use condoms or seek treatment for HIV and other diseases. Prominent HIV/AIDS researchers
among those killed in Malaysia Airlines crash. Read more here. Using a statistical model informed by previous
surveys, the researchers calculated the potential diminishment in HIV infections over the next ten years in three cities —
Vancouver, Canada; Mombasa, Kenya; and Bellary, India — should they decriminalize the trade. They found that this
policy would lower HIV’s prevalence among sex workers in Vancouver by 37 percent, by 33 percent in Mombasa, and by 46 percent
in Bellamy. “We did a systematic review of the literature of the past five years,” Steffanie Strathdee, director of the University of
California at San Diego’s Global Health Initiative and one of the paper’s authors, told VICE News. “Our evidence from the
modeling supports full decriminalization.” Public health advocates hailed the study’s conclusion. “It
highlights, for the first time, the intimate connection between a criminalized status and the risks that are
associated with it,” Marine Buissonniere, director of the Open Society Public Health Program, told VICE News. The World
Health Organization earlier this month called for decriminalizing the “behavior of key populations” at risk for HIV. “In places
where sex work is criminalized you tend to find a community that is extremely vulnerable and
marginalized, where they are subject to abuse in the healthcare system and more generally don’t
enjoy the same set of human rights,” said Buissonniere. “When a country criminalizes either sex work
or drug use it tends to push people underground and away from services.” Uganda's truck stop prostitutes
are in the country's AIDS epicenter. Read more here. Though countries like the Netherlands and Germany have legalized sex work
in defined contexts, and nations like Denmark have decriminalized it in certain circumstances (soliciting on the street is still illegal),
the only two places in the world to have fully decriminalized it are New Zealand the Australian state of New South Wales.
The
distinction is important — decriminalization removes all “prostitution-specific regulations imposed by the
state,” while legalization introduces new laws and regulations that are less punitive. In the latter framework,
sex workers without proper permits or access are still forced to work underground . “ Legalization actually
replicates some of the same problems that criminalization does, ” Strathdee said. “ The perspective is about taxes
and control and not about human rights. Even in legalized environments there are police crackdowns. ”
CP Better
Sex workers want decrim
Lutnick and Cohan 9 (Alexandra Lutnick, Public Health Analyst, Research Triangle Institute International. Deborah Cohan,
Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences, University of California San Francisco.
“Criminalization, legalization or decriminalization of sex work: what female sex workers say in San Francisco, USA”, Reproductive
Health Matters, 2009) ac 8-17
Decriminalization The
majority of study participants expressed sup- port for certain tenets of a
decriminalized model. Seventy-one per cent agreed or strongly agreed that courts should get rid of laws that make sex work
illegal. A large portion felt that they should be allowed to trade sex in strip clubs and mas- sage parlors (68%), on the streets (77%),
and in escort agencies and brothels (87%). The majority of the women, 82%, preferred street-based sex work to happen in
commercial areas and red light districts. Ninety-one per cent wanted laws that protected the rights of sex workers. Legalization The
legalization of sex work often times results in sex workers and their businesses experiencing
heightened forms of regulation that are not wit- nessed in other businesses . One-third of the
women thought that the San Francisco Health Department should regulate sex work, and 84% felt that
they should have to undergo health screening to be able to engage in sex work. Discussion The sex workers in this study
were predominately those who are considered the most marginalized . In the qualitative phase, one-third of
the women were street-based sex workers, and 25% were current injection drug users. Over two-thirds of those in the
quantitative phase reported cur- rent street-based sex work, and over half were current injection
drug users. These are the work- ers who are likely most at risk for physical and sexual assault, as
well as arrest. Taking all the women's responses into consideration, their pref- erences do not fit neatly into any one of the three
pre-existing legal frameworks. The majority of sex workers voiced a preference for removing the statutes
that criminalize sex work in order to facilitate a social and political environment where they would
have legal rights and could seek help when they were victims of violence. They did not want to be arrested
for their sex work, yet they also did not want to be regulated by government or pay taxes, sentiments that
hold true for many people. Likewise, with over half the women receiving some type of federal or state financial assistance, if they
reported sex work income they would likely cease to be eligible for assistance. While many women voiced their opposition to
government oversight, some advocated for ele- ments of regulation that are found in legalized systems, including mandated health
screening, and decriminalized models, such as zoning restric- tions. It is possible that these responses were influ- enced by the
setting where the interviews were conducted – a sex worker health clinic. As such, they may have felt that health examinations
would be done in a community-based, peer-led clinic. The preference that street-based sex work be covered by zoning restrictions
may have been informed by the reality that those who work on the street in a criminalized system have very little control over their
work situation. If there were specified areas for street prostitution, women might feel safer due to the more controlled nature of the
work environment. An argument frequently used against crimi- nalization is the rampant violence sex workers experience in
criminalized settings. 1,2,9,17 – 24 Police abuse, such as sexual demands in lieu of arrest 19,23 and excessive use of physical
force have been reported, e.g. in Canada and the United States. 21,25 Most crimes against sex workers go unpunished, as most
sex workers do not go to the police when they have been victimized. 3,22,23,26 Few papers address the risk of violence among
femalesexworkersinSanFrancisco.Inacross- sectional study of 783 adults accessing health care at St. James Infirmary from 19992004, we found that 36.3% of the women experienced sex work-related violence, and 7.9% police violence. 24 Another study
conducted in San Francisco in 1990-91 found that female sex workers, as com- pared to male and transgender workers, were at
higher risk of rape and arrest for prostitution- related offences. 27 Hay's article about police abuse of prostitutes in San Francisco
acknowledges that the most frequent type of police abuse reported by sex workers, the demand for sex in lieu of arrest, is the
hardest to verify. Many of the women in that study reported not filing a complaint when abused by a police officer as they doubted it
would result in any positive change. Hay sees police abuse as just another occupational hazard, 19 but it is presumably one th at
could be challenged more readily if prostitution were decriminalized. Even if sex work were to be decriminalized or legalized, many
things might not change. If prostitution codes were removed, there are still other legal codes such as loitering, trespassing, public
nuisance and narcotics which could be used to target sex workers. Additionally, given the deep cultural beliefs about sex work,
decrim- inalization or legalization would likely not elim- inate the stigma associated with prostitution. A change in the criminal code
would also not guar- antee access to the health and social services the women want. Incarceration should not be the only way for
the women to stop using/drinking or accessing vital services such as health care, drug treatment or housing. Any future work
towards decriminalization will need to be coupled with a commitment that the health and social services sex workers want will be
available. The
vast majority of women in this study did not want sex work to be a criminal offence,
but they did not want to be regulated by government or pay taxes either. This disparate set of preferences cannot co-exist under the framework of decriminalization. Therefore, it is clear that future work by advocacy
groups needs to explore with a diversity of sex workers the compromises they are willing to make
to ensure safe working con- ditions and the same legal protections afforded to other workers. More
of the women might be willing to pay taxes and accept the same regu- lations as other businesses if they knew it would result in the
acquisition of legal protection. This requires further inquiry. It is also probable that marginalized sex workers have not been as visible in previous decriminalization campaigns because their basic needs are not being met, and organizing for legal change is not
their immedi- ate priority. Advocacy groups need to work with sex workers – women, men and transgender – who are most
marginalized, to understand their immediate needs and how these can be addressed through decriminalization.
T 2NC
2NC – Prostitution--Includes the Patron
Supreme court and layperson understanding go neg- patron is included
Noldon, 4 -- J.D. Candidate, University of Virginia School of Law
[Tonya, Virginia Sports and Entertainment Law Journal articles editor, "Challenging First Amendment Protection of Adult Films with
the Use of Prostitution Statutes," Virginia Sports & Entertainment Law Journal, Spring 2004, 3 Va. Sports & Ent. L.J. 310, l/n,
accessed 6-21-14]
A. The Federal Prostitution Statute - The Mann Act
The federal statute commonly known as the Mann Act (or the White Slave Traffic Act) prohibits the transportation, through interstate
commerce, of any individual with the intent to have that individual engage in prostitution. n22 The [*315] highest court ruling on the
applicability of the Mann Act to adult films is the Tenth Circuit's decision in United States v. Roeder. n23 The Act was successfully
used in that case to uphold the conviction of a maker of adult films for unlawfully, willingly, and knowingly transporting in interstate
commerce an individual for the purpose of prostitution, debauchery, or other immoral purposes, in violation of the Act. n24 In this
case, the court used the Supreme Court's definition of prostitution from Cleveland v. United States, which broadly defined
prostitution as "sexual relations for hire." n25 In Roeder, a filmmaker drove a woman from Missouri to Kansas for the purpose of
having her perform sexual acts with him to make a pornographic movie. n26 Because the woman had been hired to engage in
sexual relations, thereby satisfying the Supreme Court's definition of prostitution, and had been driven across state lines for this
purpose, the Mann Act had been violated. n27 The fact that the filmmaker not only paid the woman to perform sexual acts in the
movie, but was himself in the movie acting as her sexual partner, creates a transparent analogy between the making of this adult
film and traditional prostitution transactions. As part of any layperson's understanding of prostitution, a "customer" pays an individual
to engage in sexual activity with him or her. The facts of this case seem to suggest that Roeder's conviction rested not only on his
transporting the woman through interstate commerce to participate in a pornographic film, but additionally on the fact that the
filmmaker was himself a participant in the film. n28 In essence, he fulfilled not only the broad Supreme Court definition of
prostitution, but the more basic and narrower understanding of prostitution by being the "customer" who paid a woman to have
sex with him.
Includes buyer and seller
Alaska Statues, 13
[Title 11. Criminal Law, Chapter 66. Offenses Against Public Health and Decency, Article 1. Prostitution and Related Offenses,
Alaska Stat. § 11.66.100, 4-1-14, l/n, accessed 6-21-14]
Sec. 11.66.100. Prostitution (a) A person commits the crime of prostitution if the person (1) engages in or agrees or offers to engage
in sexual conduct in return for a fee; or (2) offers a fee in return for sexual conduct. (b) Except as provided in (c) of this section,
prostitution is a class B misdemeanor. (c) Prostitution is a class C felony if (1) the defendant violates (a) of this section as a patron
of a prostitute; (2) the prostitute is under 18 years of age; and (3) the defendant is over 18 years of age and at least three years
older than the prostitute. (d) In a prosecution under (c) of this section, it is an affirmative defense that, at the time of the alleged
offense, the defendant (1) reasonably believed the prostitute to be 18 years of age or older; and (2) undertook reasonable measures
to verify that the prostitute was 18 years of age or older.
1NR
Ext1--Trafficking 2NC
Legalizing prostitution results in a net increase of prostitution – Netherlands
proves that it makes it harder to prosecute.
Raymond, professor at the University of Massachusetts, ‘3 [Janice, “Ten Reasons for Not Legalizing Prostitution And a Legal
Response to the Demand for Prostitution”, Journal of Trauma Practice, 2, 2003: pp. 315-332, RSR]
Legalized or decriminalized prostitution industries are one of the root causes of sex trafficking.
One argument for legalizing prostitution in the Netherlands was that legalization would help to end the exploitation of desperate
immigrant women who had been trafficked there for prostitution. However, one report found that 80% of women in
the
brothels of the Netherlands were trafficked from other countries (Budapest Group, 1999)(1). In 1994, the
International Organization of Migration (IOM) stated that in the Netherlands alone, “nearly 70 % of trafficked women were from
CEEC [Central and Eastern European Countries]” (IOM, 1995, p. 4). The government of the Netherlands presents itself as a
champion of anti-trafficking policies and programs, yet it has removed every legal impediment to pimping,
procuring and brothels. In the year 2000, the Dutch Ministry of Justice argued in favor of a legal quota of foreign “sex
workers,” because the Dutch prostitution market demanded a variety of “bodies” (Dutting, 2001, p. 16). Also in 2000, the Dutch
government sought and received a judgment from the European Court recognizing prostitution as an economic activity, thereby
enabling women from the European Union and former Soviet bloc countries to obtain working permits as “sex workers” in the Dutch
sex industry if they could prove that they are self employed. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in Europe
report that traffickers use the work permits to bring foreign women into the Dutch prostitution
industry, masking the fact that women have been trafficked, by coaching them to describe
themselves as independent “migrant sex workers” (Personal Communication, Representative of the International
Human Rights Network, 1999). In the year since lifting the ban on brothels in the Netherlands, eight Dutch
victim support organizations reported an increase in the number of victims of trafficking, and
twelve victim support organization reported that the number of victims from other countries has
not diminished (Bureau NRM, 2002, p. 75). Forty-three of the 348 municipalities (12%) in the Netherlands choose to follow a
no-brothel policy, but the Minister of Justice has indicated that the complete banning of prostitution within any municipality could
conflict with the federally guaranteed “right to free choice of work” (Bureau NRM, 2002, p.19). The first steps toward
legalization of prostitution in Germany occurred in the 1980s. By 1993, it was widely recognized
that 75% of the women in Germany’s prostitution industry were foreigners from Uruguay,
Argentina, Paraguay and other countries in South America (Altink, 1993, p. 33). After the fall of the Berlin wall,
80% of the estimated 10,000 women trafficked into Germany were from Central and Eastern Europe and CIS countries (IOM. 1998a
, p. 17). In 2002, prostitution in Germany was established as a legitimate job after years of being
legalized in tolerance zones. Promotion of prostitution, pimping and brothels are now legal in
Germany. The sheer volume of foreign women in the German prostitution industry suggests that
these women were trafficked into Germany, a process euphemistically described as facilitated
migration. It is almost impossible for poor women to facilitate their own migration, underwrite the costs of travel and travel
documents, and set themselves up in “business” without intervention. In 1984, a Labor government in the Australian State of Victoria
introduced legislation to legalize prostitution in brothels. Subsequent Australian governments expanded legalization culminating in
the Prostitution Control Act of 1994. Noting the link between legalization of prostitution and trafficking in Australia, the US
Department of State observed: “Trafficking in East Asian women for the sex trade is a growing
problem…lax laws – including legalized prostitution in parts of the country – make [antitrafficking] enforcement difficult at the working level” (U.S. Department of State, 2000, p. 6F).
Legalization increases human trafficking – provides a legal shield for these
operations.
Hodge, Associate Professor in the School of Social Work at Arizona State University, ‘8 [David, “Sexual Trafficking in the United
States: A Domestic Problem with Transnational Dimensions”, Social Work, Vol. 53, No. 2, April 2008, RSR]
One of the more controversial proposals to address trafficking is to legalize adult prostitution (Long, 2004). Proponents of this
approach argue that the sex industry should be brought out of the shadows and subjected to government regulation. Subsequently,
child prostitution will be eliminated and women will be protected from violence and exploitation. Little if any research,
however, has illustrated that legalizing certain forms of adult prostitution decreases illegal forms
of prostitution (Farley, 2004). Rather the converse seems to be more accurate —legalization appears to
increase the prevalence of illegal and legal prostitution (Farley, 2004; Raymond, 2004). Illegal activities
are shielded behind legal activities. Nations such as the Netherlands, which have legalized
prostitution, appear to have become magnets for traffickers and have witnessed significant
increases in child prostitution (Raymond, 2003; Sullivan & Jeffreys, 2001). Similarly, in the U nited
S tates, research suggests that the presence of large adult prostitution markets fosters higher
levels of child sexual exploitation (Estes & Weiner, 2001).
Data from Australia proves that it leads to massive growth in the trafficking
industry.
Sullivan and Jeffreys, ‘1 [Mary (PhD, Political Science, University of Melbourne) and Sheila (Associate Professor in the
Department of Political Science at the University of Melbourne), “LEGALISING PROSTITUTION IS NOT THE ANSWER: THE
EXAMPLE OF VICTORIA, AUSTRALIA”, COALITION AGAINST TRAFFICKING IN WOMEN (AUSTRALIA), 2001, RSR]
Legalisation was intended to eliminate organised crime from the sex industry. In fact the reverse has happened. Legalisation
has brought with it an explosion in the trafficking of women into prostitution by organized crime.
Convicted criminals, fronted by supposedly more reputable people, remain in the business. Fred
Lelah who ran Sasha’s International, one of Melbourne’s inner suburban legal brothels, appeared before the Melbourne Magistrate’s
court in February 2000 for introducing girls 10-15 into his business. Lelah has already served a two year term for the same offence.
sex “businessmen” are involved in the lucrative international
sex trade run by crime syndicates which is worth $A30 million in Australia. An Australian Institute of
Criminology study estimated that Australian brothels earned $1 million a week from this illegal trade . Some
examples of the trade came to light in 1999. One Melbourne sex trafficker brought 40 Thai women into
Victoria as “contract workers,” depriving them of their passports and earnings until their
contracts were worked off. This is called debt bondage . The women had to have sex with 500 men before
Recently it has been revealed that Victorian
receiving any money and were imprisoned by him (The Age, 9 May 1999). This man has since received an 18 month suspended
sentence and a fine, to the outrage of those who want the traffic of women into sex slavery taken seriously. In another case 25
Asian women were found in similar circumstances in one of Melbourne's legal brothels. These incidences are likely to be
but the tip of the iceberg , and The Age newspaper states that a number of legal brothels are known to contain such
“contract workers.” The commercial sexual exploitation of young people in Metropolitan Melbourne is also rife. ECPAT (End Child
Prostitution and Trafficking) conducted research in 1998 for the Australian National Inquiry on Child Prostitution by asking youth and
community agencies in Melbourne how many young people that had used their services had been used in prostitution. The figure
was 1 in 7. In a study conducted by the Victorian Department of human services, young people involved in commercial
sexual activities reported having “significant” contact with child sexual abuse (“paedophile”) rings.
These young people disclosed that as a consequence of their involvement with “paedophile” rings, they experienced rape and were
forced into pornography Feminist campaigners who worked through the League of Nations against the traffic in women between the
licensed brothels acted as warehouses for trafficked women (Jeffreys, Sheila,
1997. The Idea of Prostitution. Melbourne: Spinifex). Currently these brothels create a demand for constant new
recruits, and fuel the illegal trafficking industry. The U.S. State Department’s Human Rights Of all the states and
World Wars I and II argued that
territories, the highest number of reported incidences of children involved in prostitution c ame from Victoria. There was also clear
evidence of organised commercial exploitation of children.11 Report for 1999 criticises Australia for lax laws on prostitution,
including legalisation, which make it difficult to act against trafficking. It is not possible to tackle the trafficking in
women with any seriousness until brothels are abolished.
Ext2—Violence Turn 2NC
Extend 1NC 2 the violence turn
The aff normalizes exploitation—that increases violence—netherlands proves
IT ‘08
(The Irish Times citing Cari Mitchell a spokeswoman for the English Collective of Prostitutes (ECP), a network of women working in
different areas of the sex industry “Should the laws against prostitution be abolished?” February 11, 2008 Monday, Lexis, TSW)
Legalization schemes lead to a greater underground market, decreases women’s
control over their bodies and rights, recreates the state as a pimp, reinforces sex
discrimination and leads to labor rights violations
Miller and Haltiwanger 4 (Coty and Nuria, CRIME AND PUNISHMENT LAW CHAPTER: Prostitution and The
Legalization/Decriminalization Debate, The Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law, 5 Geo. J. Gender & L. 207, Spring 2004, p.
240-41)
Feminist theorists on both sides of the debate, while acknowledging the success in preventing the spread of disease, criticize the
Nevada legalization scheme as serving "the interests of men, of brothel keepers, and of tax
collectors ... while imposing heavy, and seemingly unjustified burdens on working women ." They
question the effectiveness of these regulations, pointing to the fact that illegal prostitutes in the large cities of Las
Vegas and Reno (where all forms of prostitution are prohibited) still outnumber the legal prostitutes working in
brothels throughout the rest of the state. Their strongest criticisms, however, focus on what they perceive as
a loss of independence faced by the women within the brothel system and the inherent patriarchy
of the labor relationship. The first issue of much criticism involves institutionalization of brothel-prostitution. Unlike
decriminalization that would permit all forms of prostitution, the Nevada system only allows and protects prostitution within a
licensed brothel. This policy initiative in and of itself eliminates the option of women to work on their own
where they would keep their earnings rather than share them with a brothel's management . Many
view this institutionalization of brothels as a redefinition of the "pimp-prostitute" relationship,
replacing individual pimps with a limited number of brothel owners directly linked to the
government. These critics go as far as to say that the
government is now the pimp,
controlling "with whom, when, and where the prostitute engages in
prostitution through a rigid series of time, place, and manner
restrictions." Once a prostitute is licensed, she is subject to state and county
regulations, as well as brothel "house rules" that all involve the surrender of certain
rights. In many counties, for example, women cannot "have their
children live in the community in which they work, they cannot drive a
car in the city limits, and they must be off the streets by 5 p.m." Apart
from these restrictions, a brothel prostitute has little to no options in
choosing her clients or work hours. A typical working shift for a brothel prostitute involves twelve to
fourteen hour days, every day for three weeks straight. Even faced with these restrictions on liberty, many women still choose to
enter into the brothel system because of the possibility of substantial income. However, once a prostitute has finished
paying expenses, such as room and board, maid services, condoms, mandatory tipping of
employees, and the weekly venereal disease checkups, she nets only about fifty percent of her
gross earnings. As a result, many women rather risk violence and arrest in illegal prostitution than
surrender many of their rights and half of their income. Similarly, many prostitutes do not want to incur further
stigmatization by going public as a prostitute through the licensing process. Critics of this licensing scheme assert that even if
"prostitutes are no longer stigmatized as criminals," they still suffer stigmatization as "bad girls." These critics
unlike the prostitutes that must first
obtain public licenses, patrons "do not face registration or risk friends and family finding out
emphasize the disparate treatment of prostitutes and customers, arguing that,
about their activities." The last major criticism made by feminists involves the labor classifications of women within the
brothel system. Presently, prostitutes within the brothels are considered independent contractors rather than employees. This
classification has a significant impact on benefits and social safety nets that a prostitute would enjoy if categorized as an employee.
Since prostitutes are regarded as independent contractors, brothel owners are not required to,
and thus do not, provide health insurance, workers' compensation, unemployment insurance,
vacation pay, sick leave or retirement benefits.
Legalization increases abuse against women via brothel owners and pimps,
trafficking, child prostitution and violence
Curva 12 (Ione Curva is the Research Editor, Rutgers Law Review. Candidate for J.D., Rutgers School of Law - Newark, 2012,
Thinking Globally, Acting Locally: How New Jersey Prostitution Law Reform Can Reduce Sex Trafficking, Rutgers Law Review, 64
Rutgers L. Rev. 557, Winter 12, pp. 587-88)
In order for individual prostitutes to make money (since they must give a portion of their earnings to the brothel owners), they
must see as many clients as they can each night to earn a profit. Teri, a prostitute from a Nevada brothel stated, "The
brothel owners are worse than any pimp. They abuse and imprison women and are fully protected
by the state." The legislation seems to have the opposite effect of deterring pimps and traffickers .
Moving prostitution indoors makes it more invisible so that women can be controlled in more
violent ways. "Indoor prostitution, above all, protects the trick. Men are physically and psychologically safer when prostitution is
indoors." Legalization has not resulted in a decrease of trafficked women, which was one of the law's
objectives; to the contrary, rates of trafficking have increased in places where prostitution is legal: "The European nations that have
legalized, the Netherlands and Germany, have the highest numbers of trafficked women... . The increase in numbers of
male buyers that results from legalization increases the demand for prostitution, which is met by
the trafficking of women into both legal and illegal sectors ... ." [*588] In addition to an increase in the number of trafficked
women, rates of child prostitution and child trafficking have flourished since legalization . Interpol, the
British police, and the Dutch police all agree that the Netherlands is "a prime destination and home for child sexual abusers, also
known as pedophiles." Arguments that legalization would help to "control and reduce child prostitution have not proved true, with
police suspecting that child prostitute abusers choose the Netherlands because of its prostitution-promoting environment." Similarly
there are high rates of child prostitution and trafficking in Nevada, prompting various groups - including police, the FBI, juvenile court
system, and advocacy groups - to unite to aid child victims. Nevada police have estimated that approximately 400 children are
forced into prostitution each year, though "former prostitutes say the number of children is much higher and pimps much [sic] are
more devious." In sum, though places with legalized prostitution have done so in an effort to decrease sexual exploitation, in reality
the opposite effect has occurred. In fact, female prostitutes believe that legalized prostitution benefits the state
above all. There is no evidence that legalization protects victims of trafficking and forced
prostitution; the opposite has been shown to be true. In reality, "legal prostitution is "statesponsored prostitution" with "legal brothels" akin to "little prisons."
Sex workers themselves vote neg
Farley 4 (Melissa, University of Iowa (Ph.D., Counseling Psychology, 1973), San Francisco State University (MS, Clinical
Psychology, 1966), Mills College (BA, Psychology, 1964), Prostitution Research and Education 1996–present, Kaiser Foundation
Research Institute (Oakland, CA), 1993–2000, ‘“Bad for the Body, Bad for the Heart”: Prostitution Harms Women Even if Legalized
or Decriminalized’, Violence Against Women, Vol. 10 No. 10, October 2004, www.prostitutionresearch.com/FarleyVAW.pdf//candle)
Can the physical, social, and psychological harms of prostitution be controlled or decreased by
decriminalization, regulation, or other state monitoring? Is there any way to make prostitution safer? Is it possible to protect
the human rights of those in prostitution? Does legalization or decriminalization decrease the dangers of
prostitution?¶ In May 2003, prostitution was decriminalized in New Zealand (NZ) by a one-vote majority of
its Parliament. Throughout this article, examples from NZ will be used to analyze arguments that decriminalizing prostitution would
make prostitution safer for the women in it. Four of the five reasons proposed for the decriminalization of
prostitution in NZ had to do with public health. In the law’s language, these were to safeguard the human rights of sex
workers, to protect sex workers from exploitation, to promote the welfare and occupational safety and health of sex workers, and to
create an environment that is conducive to public health. It was also alleged that the law would protect children from the exploitation
of prostitution (New Zealand Justice and Electoral Committee, 2001).2¶ Underpinning laws that legalize or
decriminalize prostitution is the belief that prostitution is inevitable. This notion is advanced from
different quarters: from pimps and johns,3 governments, public health officials, and from
sexologists and evolutionary psychologists. Pimps have, for example, promoted legalized
prostitution with the following arguments:¶ Why make a married man who is looking for nothing more than an alternative to
masturbation, get busted in a sting, have his name and picture be published in his local paper and have to explain everything to his
wife? Isn’t that destructive to society? Why have a legion of free-lance STD-spreaders when you could control and regulate sex-field
workers’ health? Why consume law- enforcement time and resources to the tune of hundreds-of- thousands of dollars per year
instead of collecting at least an equal amount in real estate and income tax withholding? It only makes sense. (Patrick, 2000, p. 12)¶
Public statements by pimps emphasize that prostitution is here to stay, with Dennis Hof in Las Vegas,
repeating the mantra that “boys will be boys.”4 A Canadian
attorney defended legal prostitution stating that prostitution “is a bottomless market” (Young, 2003).
These stereotypes about men not only normalize and trivialize prostitution but are also good
Nevada, and Heidi Fleiss in Sydney, Australia,
business strategy, relieving johns of any doubts regarding the social acceptability of their sexual
predation while at the same time inviting them to spend their money. ¶ Prostitution has been
proposed as development policy for newly industrializing and developing countries. Often, those
promoting prostitution are sex industry businessmen and government officials. Sex businesses such
as escort prostitution, mas- sage brothels, strip clubs, phone sex businesses, and Internet prostitution have been described by Lim
(1998) as the sex sector of a state’s economy. In some countries, profits from the sex sector are included in estimates of its
economic activity. For example, in¶ the Netherlands, the sex industry constitutes 5% of the GDP (Daley, 2001). Women in
Dutch prostitution tell us that although legalization of prostitution was promoted as a way to
improve their lives, they view it primarily as a way for the State to tax their earnings (Schippers, 2002).
Often they do not think that their health has benefited or that they are offered more protection
under legalized or decriminalized prostitution.¶ Some social scientists define the predatory
behaviors of men buying women in prostitution as normal, maintaining that prostitution is simply part of human nature
(Ahmad, 2001; Fisher, 1992; Masters & Johnson, 1973; Pheterson, 1996; Scambler & Scambler, 1995). This definition of
normalcy is then reflected in public policy that defines prostitution as a form of labor (sex work),
where prostitution is considered an unpleasant job but not different from other kinds of unpleasant jobs,
such as factory work. From this perspective, prostituted women are viewed as simply another
category of workers with special problems and needs (Bullough & Bullough, 1996; Kinnell, 2001; Nairne, 2000).
The World Health Organization (WHO) defined prostitution as a dynamic and adaptive process that
involves a transaction between seller and buyer of a sexual service (World Health Organization, 1988).
WHO has since recommended decriminalization of prostitution (Ahmad, 2001). Much of the health sciences
literature has viewed prostitution as a job choice (Deren et al., 1996; Farr, Castro, DiSantostefano, Claassen, & Olguin, 1996; Green
et al., 1993; Romans, Potter, Martin, & Herbison, 2001; UN/AIDS, 2002).
Yet the notion that prostitution is work
tends to make its harm invisible. ¶ Where did the idea that prostitution is work originate? In 1973, the U.S. organization
COYOTE (Call Off Your Old Tired Ethics) declared that prostitution was legitimate service work. In the 1980s, COYOTE capitalized
on the AIDS epidemic as a health cri- sis, keeping its organizational focus on increasing its customer base but shifting its strategy to
educational outreach in addition to advocacy of decriminalization of prostitution (Jenness, 1993). These goals are reflected in the
activities of the New Zealand Prostitutes’ Collective (NZPC), one of many COYOTE offshoots that provide union-style organizing for
those in prostitution. When prostitution is understood as violence, however, unionizing prostituted
women makes as little sense as unionizing battered women.
A2 Stigma
They don’t solve stigma
CAASE ‘07
(Chicago Alliance Against Sexual Exploitation “ADDRESSING MISCONCEPTIONS: Legalization” After July 2007
http://media.virbcdn.com/files/e1/FileItem-150147-AM_Legalization.pdf, TSW)
Misconception: Women involved in the sex trade would prefer to work in the regulated environment that legalization
would provide. REALITY: Arguments stating that individuals involved in the sex trade would prefer to work in a regulated
environment are negated by the fact that very few of the women in legalized prostitution actually register. For instance,
membership in the official service union in Germany, which requires employer health care, legal aid, three paid holidays a year,
and a five-day workweek, remains very low – less than five percent of the 400,000 individuals eligible for the union actually
register. 7 The reason behind this hesitance to register shows that, though the stigma of buying sex is erased when prostitution
is legalized, the stigma of selling it is not . Evidence shows that women are not eager to self identify and tend to avoid
official registrations, even when registering comes with substantial benefits . One researcher found that women involved in
prostitution in the Netherlands were concerned about the loss of anonymity that registration would require; once officially
registered as prostitutes, Dutch women feared that this designation would pursue them for the rest of their lives. Despite any
“employment” benefits that registration would provide, the women stated that they wanted to leave prostitution as quickly as possible
with no legal record of having been in prostitution. 8 Another study in the Netherlands found that only three percent of
individuals involved in prostitution believed that legalization was a good thing . 9
Health 2NC
Health 2NC
No matter legal status, prostitution always harms women—high levels of rape, assault,
and STD’s remain even in places where legalization has taken place
Farley 4 (Melissa, University of Iowa (Ph.D., Counseling Psychology, 1973), San Francisco State University (MS, Clinical
Psychology, 1966), Mills College (BA, Psychology, 1964), Prostitution Research and Education 1996–present, Kaiser Foundation
Research Institute (Oakland, CA), 1993–2000, ‘“Bad for the Body, Bad for the Heart”: Prostitution Harms Women Even if Legalized
or Decriminalized’, Violence Against Women, Vol. 10 No. 10, October 2004, www.prostitutionresearch.com/FarleyVAW.pdf//candle)
VIOLENCE IS PERVASIVE IN LEGAL AS WELL AS ILLEGAL PROSTITUTION¶ It is a cruel lie to suggest that
decriminalization or legalization will protect anyone in prostitution. There is much evidence that
whatever its legal status, prostitution causes great harm to women. The following sections summarize some
of the many studies that now document the physical and emotional harm caused by prostitution. ¶ In the past two decades, a number
of authors have documented or analyzed the sexual and physical violence that is the normative experience for women in
prostitution, including Baldwin (1993, 1999); Barry (1979, 1995); Boyer, Chapman, and Marshall (1993); Dworkin (1981, 1997,
2000); Farley, Baral, Kiremire, and Sezgin (1998); Giobbe (1991, 1993); Hoigard and Finstad (1986); Hughes (1999); Hunter (1994);
Hynes and Raymond (2002); Jeffreys (1997); Karim, Karim, Soldan, and Zondi (1995); Leidholdt (1993); MacKinnon (1993, 1997,
2001); McKeganey and Barnard (1996); Miller (1995); Silbert and Pines (1982a, 1982b); Silbert, Pines, and Lynch (1982); Valera,
Sawyer, and Schiraldi (2001); Vanwesenbeeck (1994); and Weisberg (1985). ¶ Sexual violence and physical assault
are the norm for women in all types of prostitution. Nemoto, Operario, Takenaka, Iwamoto, and Le (2003) reported
that 62% of Asian women in San Francisco massage parlors had been physically assaulted by
customers. These data were from only 50% of the massage parlors in San Francisco. The other 50%—those brothels controlled
by pimps/ traffickers who refused entrance to the researchers—were probably even more violent toward the
women inside. Raymond, D’Cunha, et al. (2002) found that 80% of women who had been trafficked or prostituted suffered
violence-related injuries in pros- titution. Among the women interviewed by Parriott (1994), 85% had been raped in
prostitution. In another study, 94% of those in street prostitution had experienced sexual assault and
75% had been raped by one or more johns (Miller, 1995). In the Netherlands, where prostitution is legal,
60% of prostituted women suffered physical assaults; 70% experienced verbal threats of physical
assault; 40% experienced sexual violence; and 40% had been forced into prostitution or sexual
abuse by acquaintances (Vanwesenbeeck, 1994). Most young women in prostitution were abused or beaten by johns as well as
pimps. Silbert and Pines (1981, 1982b) reported that 70% of women suffered rape in prosti- tution, with 65% having been physically
assaulted by customers and 66% assaulted by pimps.¶ Of 854 people in prostitution in nine countries (Canada,
71% experienced physical
assaults in prostitution, and 62% reported rapes in prostitution (Farley, Cot- ton, et al., 2003). Eighty-nine
percent told the researchers that they wanted to leave prostitution but did not have other options for
economic survival. To normalize prostitution as a reasonable job choice for poor women makes
Colombia, Germany, Mexico, South Africa, Thailand, Turkey, United States, and Zambia),
invisible their strong desire to escape prostitution. ¶ Vanwesenbeeck (1994) found that two factors were
associated with greater violence in prostitution. The greater the poverty, the greater the violence; and the
longer one is in prostitution, the more likely one is to experience violence. Similarly, the more time
women spent in prostitution, the more STDs they reported (Parriott, 1994).¶ Those promoting
prostitution rarely address class, race, and ethnicity as factors that make women even more
vulnerable to health risks in prostitution. Farley (2003a) found that in NZ, as¶ elsewhere, indigenous women are placed at
the bottom of a brutal race and class hierarchy within prostitution itself. When the researchers compared Maori/Pacific Islander New
Zealanders to European-origin New Zealanders in prostitution, the Pacific Islander/Maori were more likely to have been homeless
and to have entered prostitution at a young age. Mama Tere, an Auckland community activist, referred to NZ prostitution as an
“apartheid system” (Farley, 2003a). Plumridge and Abel (2001) similarly described the NZ sex industry as “segmented,” noting that
7% of the population in Christchurch were Maori; however, 19% of those in Christchurch prostitution were Maori. ¶ Women in
prostitution are treated as if their rapes do not matter. For example, in Venezuela, El Salvador, and Paraguay,
the penalty for rape is reduced by one fifth if the victim is a prostitute (Wijers & Lap-Chew, 1997). Many people assume that
when a prostituted woman is raped, that rape is part of her job and that she deserved or even
asked for the rape. In an example of this bias, a California judge overturned a jury’s decision to charge a
customer with rape, saying “a woman who goes out on the street and makes a whore out of
herself opens herself up to anybody” (Arax, 1986, p. 1).¶ We asked women currently in prostitution in Colombia, Germany, Mexico, South Africa, and Zambia whether they thought that legal prostitution would offer them safety from physical and
sexual assault. Forty-six percent of these women
in prostitution from six countries felt that they were no safer
from physical and sexual assault even if prostitution were legal . Brothel prostitution is legal in Germany, one
of the countries surveyed. In an indict- ment of legal prostitution, 59% of German respondents told us that they did
not think that legal prostitution made them any safer from rape and physical assault (Farley et al.,
2003). A comparable 50% of 100 prostitutes in a Washington, D.C., survey expressed the same
opinion (Valera et al., 2001).¶ It is not possible to protect the health of someone whose “job” means
that they will get raped on average once a week (Hunter, 1993). One woman explained that prostitution is
“like domestic violence taken to the extreme” (Leone, 2001). Another woman said, “What is rape for others, is
normal for us” (Farley, Lynne, & Cotton, in press).
AIDS 2NC
Extend 1NC 2 - Threat is decreasing—it will be controlled within 20 eyars—deaths
are falling across the board—that’s Kelland—prefer her, she cites a UN report