Hacker News Reader

Comment by austincheney | Hacker News Reader

I doubt that because there is a social stigma to prostitution that other minor vices don’t have. For example (hypothetical) if my wife found me using recreational drugs she would be pissed and force me into counseling, but if she found me with a prostitute it’s game over.

View on HN

Well, the precise type of "sunlight" needed is that prostitutes and clients don't need to hide their business from the police, and can conduct their business in a publicly visible building, which the police can inspect at any time (to follow up on reports, or just go check that all the girls have valid-looking IDs, which can be followed up on if their suspicions are raised).

Whether you hide your patronage from people who know you is a different matter. (The medical system is a good example in this respect: hospitals and other facilities are absolutely not hiding their presence from anyone—quite the opposite, really—but the fact that you visited Doctor Jones to treat your potentially embarrassing medical condition is considered very confidential information.)

Medical privacy only exists because of HIPAA and doctor-client confidentiality. Neither of those would apply to the legalization of sex work. Your opinion is valid, but you chose a poor example for comparison.

Only, eh? Direct quote from the website of Nevada's Bunny Ranch: "Moreover, a Bunny Ranch encounter is entirely discreet, taking place in a private environment where the deepest, most intimate secrets of clientele remain confidential." It would very much hurt the Bunny Ranch's reputation if they reneged on that; it seems clear that confidentiality is something many of their customers value highly.

Just because the law doesn't mandate confidentiality doesn't mean the customers won't expect it and reliably get it.

Seriously? You are confusing a company’s privacy claim for criminal law.

My point was that "a service operates in the open" is compatible with "the customers of the service require confidentiality". Medical services are an example of that, an example in which people think that the need for confidentiality is so high that they made laws for it.

If they need a similar law for prostitution, they could pass one (I wouldn't be surprised if one already exists for a sufficiently broad category of "theraputic" services), but I doubt it would be necessary—at a brothel, only someone who verifies ages even needs to see a client's ID (and I suspect they could cover up the name); and as I said, it's strongly against the brothel's interest for there to even be rumors of non-confidentiality. I suspect a law would only move it from 99% privacy to 99.9% or something.

I do not doubt it - as there are plenty of people in the US without wives to force them and who would gladly hand out info to those on how to escape forced labor while seeking the services of volunteer labor - social stigma or not.

Really? Drugs are a lot more dangerous than sex.

I doubt it. STDs are pretty bad you know.

That depends on the drug. Cannabis (eaten or vaporized, not sure about smoked), psilocybin, and LSD are safer than sex with an untested partner, especially if they can be purchased in a regulated market.

How many people die each year from drug addiction or overdose versus sex? In U.S. 100K people a year die from alcohol. 90K+ from Overdosing. And 130K+ die from lung cancer. The only deadly non-treatable STD is HIV and that is a slow killer at best and quite rare (15.8K deaths per year by HIV positive). With a condom, risk is reduced 99%. Meanwhile, sex also increases the number of births, so by far sex is less deadly than drugs.

It's basically impossible to overdose on the drugs I listed. Alcohol and tobacco are not on the list, as they are known to be quite dangerous.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com