Should brothels be banned?

[ElizabethB.]

Actually, I can ask you to know something about the models used to estimate the effect of intelligence on income, since your the one citing empirical work in support thereof. I am not familiar with that area of academic/empirical work, but I thought you might be since you're citing it.

I am not citing any specific econometrics papers to rebut the assertion about intelligence on income levels. My point was that the results of a statistical study can depend the stats model used and the data used to estimate it. There are a lot of econometric papers that try to estimate various things. For instance there are papers that 1) try to estimate the incidence of corporate taxation, 2) try to test EMH hypothesis, 3) try to estimate the multiplier, or 4) try to estimate the effect of minimum wage on employment. In each of these type of analysis, different models can be used along with different data sets. The results of each type of paper will often depend on the model used and the data.

Just as an example: Determining the Multiplier

Some stats models that have been used are:

1. A Vector Auto Regression

2. A regime switching Vector Auto Regression

3. A DSGE model with the parameters calibrated from micro-economic studies

4. A Random Effect Model That Looks At Variation By Geographic area

5. A Vector Auto Regression That Uses A "News Variable" (As has been used by Ramy, Romer, etc)

Each type of these different models might give different results. For instance, a non-linear model is probably going to give a different result than a linear one. Also, the data sets can have an effect on estimates for various reasons. For instance, if you estimate a model with data that looks primarily at war time spending (and the reason for this would be to eliminate the problem endogenity) your results might differ considerably from a data set that covers the last half of the Twentieth Century (which would probably require to make some assumption to deal with endogenity problems). An argument can be made that some of these models are better than others.

Your assumption might be correct. But its marginal effect might be very small. And there could be other factors that are way more important in determining the "quality of an interaction". Also, the marginal effect of intelligence on the quality of an interaction could possibly decline at some point, meaning that it's effect is not linear. And if certain levels of intelligence are correlated with negative personality traits, like arrogance or aloofness, then the effect of intelligence upon the "quality of an interaction" might turn negative at some point.

Can I please print the end on a t-shirt?

[OldGimletEye]

Can I please print the end on a t-shirt?

By all means, please feel free to do so.

[Deicida]

Actually, I can ask you to know something about the models used to estimate the effect of intelligence on income, since your the one citing empirical work in support thereof. I am not familiar with that area of academic/empirical work, but I thought you might be since you're citing it.

I am not citing any specific econometrics papers to rebut the assertion about intelligence on income levels. My point was that the results of a statistical study can depend the stats model used and the data used to estimate it. There are a lot of econometric papers that try to estimate various things. For instance there are papers that 1) try to estimate the incidence of corporate taxation, 2) try to test EMH hypothesis, 3) try to estimate the multiplier, or 4) try to estimate the effect of minimum wage on employment. In each of these type of analysis, different models can be used along with different data sets. The results of each type of paper will often depend on the model used and the data.

Just as an example: Determining the Multiplier

Some stats models that have been used are:

1. A Vector Auto Regression

2. A regime switching Vector Auto Regression

3. A DSGE model with the parameters calibrated from micro-economic studies

4. A Random Effect Model That Looks At Variation By Geographic area

5. A Vector Auto Regression That Uses A "News Variable" (As has been used by Ramy, Romer, etc)

Each type of these different models might give different results. For instance, a non-linear model is probably going to give a different result than a linear one. Also, the data sets can have an effect on estimates for various reasons. For instance, if you estimate a model with data that looks primarily at war time spending (and the reason for this would be to eliminate the problem endogenity) your results might differ considerably from a data set that covers the last half of the Twentieth Century (which would probably require to make some assumption to deal with endogenity problems). An argument can be made that some of these models are better than others.

Your assumption might be correct. But its marginal effect might be very small. And there could be other factors that are way more important in determining the "quality of an interaction". Also, the marginal effect of intelligence on the quality of an interaction could possibly decline at some point, meaning that it's effect is not linear. And if certain levels of intelligence are correlated with negative personality traits, like arrogance or aloofness, then the effect of intelligence upon the "quality of an interaction" might turn negative at some point.

Wow, impressive argument. I am familiar with it; my reason for asking for specific papers was that it's generally more effective to prove that A is better than B rather than that A is good. You don't need to explain data sets and statistical models to me, I know what they are.

Even if the effect were very small, as long as the relationship is directly proportional, it doesn't matter what other unrelated factors have greater influence on the result. If it is non-linear like you suggest, what I am proposing may only be valid for a limited domain, since the expression of personality traits is subjective and no doubt depends on the traits and intelligence of the second person taking part in the interaction. Please note that I didn't describe the relationship between intelligence and quality of interaction as linear. I merely claimed it is proportional and as I am sure you know, non-linear proportionality is possible. No research in this area seems to exist - even if it did, personality is hardly quantifiable in any meaningful way - so we're unlikely to get an answer as to which theory is correct, regardless of the validity of the Bell Curve.

That said, the person with whom I was having this argument, Dorian Martell, never questioned the nature of this relationship, instead insisting on the importance of the effects of seemingly unrelated factors and outliers. He lectured me on the many influences besides intelligence that determine a person's career. I acknowledged their existence but pointed out their statistical insignificance, according to the Bell Curve, the validity of which he also did not question. He mentions personality as well, but does not relate it to intelligence. To disprove his claims, I posted this:

Assuming the following:

• the quality of a personal interaction is proportional to intelligence
• the quality of a personal interaction is inversely proportional to being an asshole
• income is proportional to intelligence
• the likelihood of being an asshole is unrelated to income

You can conclude that the quality of a personal interaction is proportional to income. Of course there are other factors, but as long as they are unrelated to income or intelligence (like the probability of being an asshole), they don't change the outcome in any way.

I maintain that this a valid argument, under the additional assumptions he made.

[Dya of Oldstones]

According to Deicida the most intelligent people earn the highest incomes. The 'intelligent' people earning the high incomes are the only people with interesting conversations and worth talking too.

We've also learned on this thread that some of the women working in the legal Nevada brothels make very high incomes as do women working in high end escort services. (there maybe men in these services who make high incomes as well)

Ergo, high income prostitutes thereby constitute some of the most intelligent people on the planet and have the most interesting and sparkling conversations to boot.

It all makes sense now.

:rofl:

And a bit of irony here; The Mayflower Madam by Sydney Biddle Barrows is used as a text book in business schools and courses in colleges, and it was in a business course i took where I first heard of the book.

For anyone not familiar with her, she's from an old money family and ran an escort business back in the 80's and many of the girls working for her came from similarly privileged backgrounds. When her business was raided after her arrest, the cops and investigators were shocked at how clean she kept her books, which may be why MM found it's way into business schools.

[ChillyPolly]

I agree with JohnSnow4President here Polly - you seem to be assuming that every prostitute is a down on their luck streetwalker, controlled by some crime lord/drug dealer pimp.

Not at all. I am not saying that. And no sane and honest person with remotely adequate reading comprehension skills would ever claim that I "seem" to be saying it. You and JohnSnow4President are out of line.

For instance, in my last response to you, I did not deny the possibility of autonomous prostitutes who could pick and choose their own clientelle, I merely pointed out that they would not fill the "niche" you spoke of. And I agreed with you that this "niche" (that such autonomous prostitutes do not fill) largely drives the demand for prostitution.

It's also a difference in ethics, more than facts.

Some would say the john does not KNOW for a fact that the prostitute he pays for is being harmed and/or that the money he pays is being funneled to harm other women; therefore he is innocent and has the green light to pay her and screw her.

I assume the exact same facts, and reach an opposite conclusion. I think he does not know, therefore should walk away. The uncertainty outweighs his need for a cheep thrill. The john is being irresponsible.

[Syrio Fo-real]

I have not read this entire thread but I will cast my vote.

Hell NO brothels should not he banned. Regulated maybe to prevent widespread disease but it is a victimless crime

[ChillyPolly]

What can you show as facts?

I thought I provided several links. I assume you did not read them. You probably won't read this either:

Inconvenient statistics, feral facts like the average life expectancy of prostitutes, the average age of induction into prostitution, the average income of prostitutes, and so forth – hard demographics – have never disturbed those who defined the sex business as a force of liberation. The fact that the ‘freedom’ being realized is mostly the freedom of men to access the bodies of women and children – or of G8 nations to access the markets and raw materials of Third World nations – is conveniently overlooked when predation is redefined as progress. (D.A. Clarke, 2004)

Prostitution, Liberalism, and Slavery, by Melissa Farley

http://logosjournal.com/2013/farley/

[Bryanfury]

Another journalist who doesn't cite the claims being made. Step up your game, at this point I've provided more relevant and peer-reviewed research arguing against prostitution than you have. You keep posting stupid opinion pieces that frequently throw terms around with zero proof, evidence, support etc. i mean that article virtually says that the American government is deliberately allowing slavery of southeast asian women specifically for the San Francisco sex industry. Thats a huge claim but there is nothing in the article to back it up.

[JonSnow4President]

Not at all. I am not saying that. And no sane and honest person with remotely adequate reading comprehension skills would ever claim that I "seem" to be saying it. You and JohnSnow4President are out of line.

For instance, in my last response to you, I did not deny the possibility of autonomous prostitutes who could pick and choose their own clientelle, I merely pointed out that they would not fill the "niche" you spoke of. And I agreed with you that this "niche" (that such autonomous prostitutes do not fill) largely drives the demand for prostitution.

It's also a difference in ethics, more than facts.

Some would say the john does not KNOW for a fact that the prostitute he pays for is being harmed and/or that the money he pays is being funneled to harm other women; therefore he is innocent and has the green light to pay her and screw her.

I assume the exact same facts, and reach an opposite conclusion. I think he does not know, therefore should walk away. The uncertainty outweighs his need for a cheep thrill. The john is being irresponsible.

The major difference is that the prostitute is relatively cheap, and has been maneuvered by circumstances (or whatever) to be not in a position to say no, to the point where she is more or less compelled to accept whomever pays her fee. If the prostitute were really able to turn men down the way other women do, and sleep only with men they like, most johns would themselves in the same boat, and she would not be able to fill that "niche" you are talking about

Yes. I am clearly out of line for taking this paragraph as a lack of comprehension that many prostitutes are in it by choice.

As far as your last sentence there, I doubt that occurs. The prostitute isn't doing this because she finds her clients sexually attractive. She is doing it for the money. Doing it for the money does not change the fact that she consented, only the fact that the reasons for her consent are different than wanting sexual gratification. The niche still gets filled.

[ChillyPolly]

Yes. I am clearly out of line for taking this paragraph as a lack of comprehension that many prostitutes are in it by choice.

Absolutely. The passage you quote does not say that. It applies to the vast majority of prostitutes. There was no particular need to explicitly acknowledge the rare exception, since I had already done that multiple times previously in this thread, as you were no doubt already aware.

[ChillyPolly]

Another journalist who doesn't cite the claims being made.

She does provide citations. You just say things don't you. You don't care whether any of it is true.

[Bryanfury]

Sorry, I stopped looking at her reference list of articles after she listed her own several times, and I realised she didn't actually reference anything in the reference list; take for example her last two references in her 14th to last paragraph being the years 2012 and 2011 with no name accompanying them and no 2012 or sources being in the reference list at all. Note that the final 13 paragraphs are completely without citation.

Buddy, she's outright typing unsourced bullshit much of the time and filling a reference list with sources that she hasn't used beyond random quotes without purpose or to support what she has said.

I acknowledge that I was wrong to call this unpublished work though.

[ChillyPolly]

Buddy, she's outright typing unsourced bullshit 90% of the time

And what about you? You only type unsourced bullshit 48% of the time? Or is that 99.928 % of the time?

I don't even know which claims you are disputing. You seem to be looking for excuses for sticking your head in the sand.

Do you deny (for instance) that the life expectancy for prostitutes is atrocious? Or do you just not care?

[Bryanfury]

Your article didn't give individual country statistics comparable with liberalised laws in order for me to form an opinion to your question beyond stating that I doubt the life expectancy of prostitutes in Thailand and Denmark are the same, for example. Also, attributing lower life expectancy to prostitution itself is short-sighted; we must consider why the life expectancy is low, and compare it to other professions. I don't appreciate the 'do not care' comment at all.

http://eminism.org/blog/entry/date/2011/07

Basically this lists many other concerns with Farleys writings beyond her failure to cite much of her writing correctly, including outright lies. Often Farley is flawed also because she frequently uses streetwalkers to base her attacks on brothels and escorts, or how she draws conclusions On legal prostitution using data on illegal trafficking. 'm sure you can see the issue.

Again I acknowledge that a few posts back I jumped the gun a little in slandering her writing, which is why I took the time to back my opinion on it up.

[Red Typer of Dorne]

What a stupid idea: banning the brothels.

I, personally woul do three things:

1- All the brothels would be only managed by the prostitutes themselves and they will be the only owners of the brothel.

2- Anyone that try to manage or be the owner of a brothel and it isn't a prostitute would be executed.

3- Taxes over the brothels.

This, the only way to fully separate trafficking from the sex trade is to outlaw third party ownership. If the ladies own the astablishment and keep all of their earnings there would be no way for the likes of LF to profit from trafficking sex slaves. The ladies would be responsible for hiring their own security and have complete freedom of the clients they entertained, and could leave the trade whenever they wished.

Outlawing brothels all together would make the trade even more dangerous for the girls, in a brothel there are other people and so a level of protection, if there were no brothels, the girls would be delivered wherever they were wanted with no protection.

[ElizabethB.]

This, the only way to fully separate trafficking from the sex trade is to outlaw third party ownership. If the ladies own the astablishment and keep all of their earnings there would be no way for the likes of LF to profit from trafficking sex slaves. The ladies would be responsible for hiring their own security and have complete freedom of the clients they entertained, and could leave the trade whenever they wished.

Outlawing brothels all together would make the trade even more dangerous for the girls, in a brothel there are other people and so a level of protection, if there were no brothels, the girls would be delivered wherever they were wanted with no protection.

Perfect. Good point on security as well.

[OldGimletEye]

Wow, impressive argument. I am familiar with it; my reason for asking for specific papers was that it's generally more effective to prove that A is better than B rather than that A is good. You don't need to explain data sets and statistical models to me, I know what they are.

Like I said, I am not that familiar with the line of empirical research that pertains to the marginal effect of intelligence on income. What I do know is that whenever you're trying to answer a question empirically, you need to be aware of the limitations of certain types of models and the data used to estimate those models. With other areas of research, I am aware of the various limitations of their modelling assumptions. Most models will have some sort of limitation. It's a reason that I generally prefer to read several different papers, using different models and data sets in order to get a grasp of what is likely true.

As you are probably aware, one of the biggest issues that sociological and economic research faces it that it has to rely on observational data, rather than data you'd collect from an experiment in a lab. With observational data, you are more likely to have problems with omitted variable bias, endogeneity, and so forth. Accordingly, it's good know how researchers are dealing with these types of problems. Of course, different types of empirical problems will often have a differing sets of issues.My particular knowledge of the statistical issues of the various statistical models that have tried to estimate the marginal effect of intelligence upon income is limited. I was being lazy and was hoping somebody would give me a brief overview. I guess I'll just start having to read the papers for myself.

To be honest, I wouldn't be that surprised to learn that IQ does have some effect on income. How large that effect is, I wouldn't know and I would be bit a skeptical that it is as important as Murray claims.

Even if the effect were very small, as long as the relationship is directly proportional, it doesn't matter what other unrelated factors have greater influence on the result. If it is non-linear like you suggest, what I am proposing may only be valid for a limited domain, since the expression of personality traits is subjective and no doubt depends on the traits and intelligence of the second person taking part in the interaction. Please note that I didn't describe the relationship between intelligence and quality of interaction as linear. I merely claimed it is proportional and as I am sure you know, non-linear proportionality is possible. No research in this area seems to exist - even if it did, personality is hardly quantifiable in any meaningful way - so we're unlikely to get an answer as to which theory is correct, regardless of the validity of the Bell Curve.

When you say its "directly proportional", I interpret that as meaning: for some range of IQ it is the case that the marginal effect upon the "quality of interaction" remains positive. That, I'll grant is probably true. So, I'll grant you a victory here. But, your victory might not be that impressive if the marginal effect of intelligence is small, particularly when compared to other traits of a person. Perhaps a more relevant question is to ask is: How much on the margin are people willing to trade the trait of intelligence, when interacting with another, for other personality traits?

[Suzanna Stormborn]

Is the idea that prostitution is bad really that radical an idea to you?

That's not even it. What bothers me is that a male (who has clearly never been starving, or had children who are starving) can sit there and say all those things. It's honest work, Service provided = food on the table/roof over your head, maybe it is not a job that the 1% will ever have to do, but guess what 99% of people are not in the 1% and life costs money, food costs money, school costs money. Everyone has a different path, and I think it is beyond fucked up to make statements about other peoples choices/occupation/lifestyles when you have no idea what they have been through or what led them to where they are.

Yah.

That is working pretty well with drugs.

Outlawing drugs is stoping the traffic and impoverishing the drug lords.

Legalizing drugs/prostitution, increasing the state control over the drugs/prostitution, will better protect the consumers/prostitutes, ruining the drug lords/pimps, decreasing violent criminality, while gaining more taxes to the state, taxes that can be used in a all kind of things: from manutention of public buildings to social protection of the more poor, here and in the Seven Kingdoms.

yes exactly, in every country that decriminalizes drugs statistics show that drug use/overdoses/use of harsher drugs actually decreases. Now that is a fact.

[ChillyPolly]

That's not even it. What bothers me is that a male (who has clearly never been starving, or had children who are starving) can sit there and say all those things. It's honest work, Service provided = food on the table/roof over your head, maybe it is not a job that the 1% will ever have to do, but guess what 99% of people are not in the 1% and life costs money, food costs money, school costs money. Everyone has a different path, and I think it is beyond fucked up to make statements about other peoples choices/occupation/lifestyles when you have no idea what they have been through or what led them to where they are.

I don't tend to discuss my gender with humans, because it is none of their business. They might try to breed me, or something. But if you think you can guess my gender from my name or the color of my plumage, be my guest.

The idea that prostitution causes harm to women, and/or is immoral for other reasons, is far from new. I have provided links to female writers, many of whom are far more strident about this than I have been. Traditionally, women have usually been its harshest critics.

I never denied that women are forced into prostitution for lack of other viable choices, nor did I judge anyone for things they cannot help. I merely said that those few who DO have a choice, should not do it. Your comments on this are bizarre.

Prostitution is not work at all. It grows no crops, cooks no food, creates no products, educates no children, contributes nothing of value to the culture. It does cause money to change hands, but the general effect is NOT to redistribute wealth to those who need it. Quite the reverse.

You talk of the 1%. What 1% are you talking about? The 1% of women who are prostitutes? Good grief, you talk as though you think 99% of lower-class women are prostitutes.

I don't agree that it is "fucked up" to make moral judgments about people's behavior. Moral judgments are essential for a viable civilization. The alternative is moral nihilism, and that is the death of civilization.

[JonSnow4President]

I don't tend to discuss my gender with humans, because it is none of their business. They might try to breed me, or something. But if you think you can guess my gender from my name or the color of my plumage, be my guest.

The idea that prostitution causes harm to women, and/or is immoral for other reasons, is far from new. I have provided links to female writers, many of whom are far more strident about this than I have been. Traditionally, women have usually been its harshest critics.

I never denied that women are forced into prostitution for lack of other viable choices, nor did I judge anyone for things they cannot help. I merely said that those few who DO have a choice, should not do it. Your comments on this are bizarre.

Prostitution is not work at all. It grows no crops, cooks no food, creates no products, educates no children, contributes nothing of value to the culture. It does cause money to change hands, but the general effect is NOT to redistribute wealth to those who need it. Quite the reverse.

You talk of the 1%. What 1% are you talking about? The 1% of women who are prostitutes? Good grief, you talk as though you think 99% of lower-class women are prostitutes.

What I do doesn't grow crops, cook food, create products, educate children, and really contributes nothing of value to the culture. I bust my ass so my company can charge a corporation an obscene amount to provide an objective opinion on their financial statements. At the end of the day, my job is just to provide the legwork for that letter, so that maybe some investor might look at the financials and not be completely lied to 95% of the time (because we do all our statistical samples with a 95% confidence interval).

Does that mean my 9-6:30 every Monday-Friday, with a lot of work from home after hours isn't work? Does that mean my 100+ hour weeks coming up in January and February are not work?

Prostitutes, at the heart of the job, are just like cooks, waiters, car washers, furniture movers, or any other personal service line. They provide a service, using the talents of their body, that someone else doesn't want to do, and would rather pay money to get it done.

The other issues (human trafficking, drugs, etc.) are separate issues that have become attached to prostitution as practiced illegally, but are not an inherent part of the job.