Prostitution in Germany: Has liberalisation gone too far?
economist.com
economist.com
Trafficking and exploitation is definitely a problem but I'm not sure if the law change from 2001 has made matters worse or better.
In fact, from outside presentation, it's easy in some cases to mistake a bordello for a girlie bar, a private nudist club, a massage parlor, a swinger club, or whatever. When I was working on our startup, we were selling some of our old displays once and a middle aged business woman came in to buy them. We got talking and she told us she was running a brothel. Being a business ourselves, we quickly exchanged stories and experiences that sounded very similar (we were a software startup that had nothing to do with sex). The gist of it was for me, that looking into this somewhat alien world, these brothels are just normal small businesses. I'm sure there are brutal mafia-owned exploitation joints in this country, but the average urban brothel seems to be more like a mom and pop shop. The article claims that only 44 sex workers took advantage of social benefits, but that simply cannot be the whole story. This brothel owner I talked with told me that while the girls register with other occupation names officially, every single one of them was getting a normal wage, with taxes and everything.
From where I'm standing, the fact that it's not illegal helps a lot of people with no discernible downside.
Are there appalling slave labor shops based on human trafficking? I'm sure they exist, but they are illegal. I'm also sure those do not make up the vast majority of brothels in Germany. As for the rest, it's difficult to make a convincing argument that the country would be a better place for anyone if they would be driven underground.
Anecdotally I do get the feeling that prostitutes as a profession are mainly serving an older generation though, so I'm not sure if they remain economically viable anyway.
Why would you think so? The number of older people is just growing.
I'm generally if favour of legalising prostitution. People with free will exchanging money for sex is fine. And having legal prostitution should allow better regulation - children and trafficked workers get better protection; legal sex workers get better health care.
But those things that make legal prostitution more acceptable make it more expensive, which is the gap filled by criminal gangs exploiting trafficked workers.
> Anecdotally I do get the feeling that prostitutes as a profession are mainly serving an older generation though, so I'm not sure if they remain economically viable anyway.
Everybody gets old. Online dating shows there are many lonely people.
I'm gently surprised there's nothing exploiting the gap between "rent a friend" and "sex work" for "rent someone to give you fully clothed, non-sexual, hugging and conversation".
True. I have always been surprised that there are no actual (for lack of a better word) escort services here: places where you rent someone to go out with, or to attend social functions with. If this existed, I must confess I'd have used it several times already. There are social events where showing up alone is simply not a good option.
And you mean in Germany seeing a private nudist club or a swinger club in the street wouldndn't be surprising, or immediately tag the area as seedy?
For the most part I think you're right. On the one hand I think the idea of, say, a swinger club is somewhat adorable, but in practice it's sometimes hard not to laugh about German sex culture with all of its curious stereotypes. I went to a "normal" rave party once, and the highlight of the evening was a banquet table with a naked girl on it which you could eat fruit off of. Personally though I find the BDSM stuff hard to swallow, especially if young people are doing this it's just kind of sad.
What is sad about young people enjoying BDSM?
"Anecdotally I do get the feeling that prostitutes as a profession are mainly serving an older generation though, so I'm not sure if they remain economically viable anyway."
Prostitution is tied to the nature of the sexuality of men - which is likely not going to change in the next time. There is a strong demand for uncomplicated, quick, cheap sexual satisfaction within the male population, and prostitutes cater to this demand. The image of the 60 year old unemployed client is wrong.
There was a nice article in the last FAS (Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung 17.11.2013, a leading German newspaper) that reported on a biased podium discussion of a well known stone age feminist. I found the article to be nice because it discussed the needs of prostitutes e.g. respect of the customer, hygienic business practices, safe environment, etc.
> Prostitution is tied to the nature of the sexuality of men
It's obviously not tied to my nature nor the nature of most men in my social circle. Are we not real men, then? I get that the intent here was probably to express how prostitution is fueled by male desire, but I don't agree with the implication that this is how all men feel.
What I meant to say is that prostitution is one way to satisfy the unfulfilled sex drive a man has. I was not talking about feelings, but about a - so to say - intrinsic biological potential to find a mate and copulate. A man will consider the offer of a prostitute on a simple sexual basis if he is attracted to her. It is a biological drive that each individual seeks to have satisfied. If this drive is not satisfied, the stimulus for attraction can be lower.
Of course, there is also a strong emotional factor involved, ethical components, fears (e.g. STDs, being caught etc). But I was not referring to that.
Please note that I was not trying to picture men as animals - on the contrary, I was just trying to show that male sexual behaviour has strong biological components. As does the sexual behaviour of women.
I would like to know what factors are the most important in the rejection of a prostitute's offer, as I think that prostitution it is part of a deep sociological process. It would not surprise me if the hygienic component would be the strongest one.
[1] http://www.bmfsfj.de/BMFSFJ/root,did=132012.html (German)
As for whether it leads to more prostitution overall, that is not scientifically established.
Admittedly, there is a sector of prostitution, where that law didn't change a thing. That's where the actual crimes happen.
Nobody created the liberalization laws with the intent to lower prostitution rate overall.
The situation before was a bit more aweful than with the (liberal) law. Prostitution was legal, but only doing it. When it came to legally enforce payment, sex workers didn't have much in their hand. That arguably supported pimping and bringing the "sex business" into shady regions.
One of my ex girlfriends became a prostitute. It's one example only. She loved (and supposedly still loves) sex. She was never for long term commitment. She is financially doing well. She featured in a documentary on the industry, and she provides counseling for abused women.
Very insightful posters. Glad to see common sense prevail, rather than the usual gender war (emotive) arguments.
Thanks for the link.
No
The problem with the laws in Germany is that liberal laws can't change society. If prostitution is this shady thing where only drug addicts work.. well then no matter the laws, the development of a proper industry is harmed. It will take at least another generation to get rid of the old mindset.
define "evil"
Whatever the law makers define as undesirable for society.
Notice parent comment uses "perceived" evil.
Law makers perceive drugs as harmful for the users and society, they perceive drugs as evil. The accuracy of their perceptions are not discussed in parent comment.
Legalise drugs as well. Drug addicts need help, whether they are prostitutes or not. If we can help these women clean up, they may choose to leave prostitution and do something else.
>> But whereas progressive Swedes view their state as able to set positive goals, Germans (the Greens, especially) mistrust the state on questions of personal morality as a hypocritical and authoritarian threat to self-expression. Only this can explain why Swedes continue overwhelmingly to support their policy, and Germans theirs.
Sweden is consensus driven. Only one opinion is allowed at a time in many subjects. No media(/political party) is arguing the German solution in Sweden, it would just be impossible.
Me? I have an unusual attitude in Sweden. I ask: What works best? Frankly, I don't know. The Swedish way sounds nicer, but... does it really work?
(I don't really trust Swedish research on this, a large part of that will come with an agenda.)
Some other Swede will comment and claim I'm totally misrepresenting everything about just one opinion at a time.
Then I will point out e.g. that in Sweden housing just isn't being built, because it would lose votes (and probably lobbying from the big building companies that like the present situation). This at the same time as the population is increasing quickly. This is insane -- but the media isn't screaming at the politicians anyway. Another thing not discussed [immigration].
(There, I saved HN from a few more stupid comments.)
What I would really want to see is trafficking statistics for Sweden and Germany. This is a modern slave trade that destroy people's lives by torturing them for money. Worse than heroin.
Edit: "k__", read the article. It isn't outlawed to sell sex in .se, it is outlawed to buy it. That is a difference compared to drugs. The effects of this is uncertain.
The politicians see the problems and try to erase them instead of thinking about the causes.
The problem isn't people having sex for money or people giving money for sex. The problem are those who force other ones to do their bidding.
It's legal for two people to exchange sex for money.
But then there are some added technicalities: two or more women cannot share a property to use for sex work (because that becomes a brothel); people cannot control sex workers (pimping is illegal); it's illegal to pay a trafficked worker for sex; etc etc.
These have been added over the years, and so we have a confusing situation. People don't really know what is or isn't legal.
With this kind of stuff law should be clear because it's mostly about telling society what is acceptable. That guides people into making less unacceptable choices. (EG: Curb crawling: "Pay women to have sex is okay; but don't approach women on the street in your car and ask if they're prostitutes". That law should be about guiding people to use advertised prostitutes, but it's used to clamp down on all prostitution.)
How is it nicer? Do you think it's ok for the State to decide what two consenting adults can do with their own bodies?
Just like my right to walk the street without being shot outweighs anyone elses right to carry a gun there.
> Just like my right to walk the street without being shot outweighs anyone elses right to carry a gun there.
I disagree with that too, people should be free to own guns, not just the government. Using guns against people for anything but self-defense should be and is illegal though. It's fascinating how much people can trust their government to the point of giving them the right of what they should do with their own bodies, sexuality and more. I'm from Europe though, so I'm used to that.
So assume we are left with a choice of two laws: completely legal or completely illegal.
This law will thus have one of two drawbacks: It will allow forcing people to sell sex without consent or it will make it illegal for consenting adults to do so. There is no more or less freedoms here, it's just different freedoms for different groups.
Thinking prohibiting prostitution will make sex trafficking disappear is delusional and I'm surprised to read such thing on HN. What's next? The war on drug is working? So what should we do? Remove people freedom to engage in prostitution even though sex trafficking will still exist or respect people's freedom and keep prostitution illegal? Same thing with drugs really.
And you are surprised to hear this on HN why? Is this a libertarian haven of some kind?
Seriously? You buy into this kind of rhetoric? A law against buying something is a law against selling it too. That's just common sense.
The visible prostitution as you say, but it's just gone underground. Rape has also gone up. Even then, if it went away, this would mean it'd ruin perfectly fine and peaceful business between consenting adults... while granting the state the power to decide what you can or can't do with your body. How is that a victory. I wonder.
> In fact it seems to have worked so well that a similar law is proposed in France.
yeah, France is all over prohibition too and nany state. No surprise here.
> And you are surprised to hear this on HN why? Is this a libertarian haven of some kind?
As the article says, it's not a libertarian stance as in Germany green lefties support legal prostitution. It's a matter of freedom and not letting the state decide what you can do with your very own body. If you're fine with the state telling you what you can or can't do to your own body, good for you. But don't force it on others. That's just as bad as religious people forcing their opinion on others by law (prop 8, no Jews/atheists/women allowed in office etc).
So: The premise of this öaw in Sweden is, basically, that there exists almost zero (or at least little enough to ignore) "fine and peaceful business between consenting adults", so that is a non-issue. I think it is due to several factors
1) only street prostitution is extensively investigated, and the street prostitution is basically trafficking victims, drug users and so on. 2) There is little or no "German" sex industry, i.e. no brothels or other "well organized" industry. 3) Few argue that it is an important human freedom to buy or sell sex, and very few would have a problem with the State having a say in it.
I don't know if there has been much research done on whether the prostitution has moved under ground, one can't simply assert it, and it is very hard to investigate (and to interpret the numbers! internet prostitution is way up between 1990 and 2010 because internet)
Btw. I don't think there is any research establishing the connection between increased levels of rape with stricter laws or reduced levels of prostitution?
If one accepts that problem as real, then one could also say that while there may be both consenting buyers and sellers out there, there are no buyers that can claim they are actually dealing with a consenting seller.
The argument is powerful because it dismisses the whole "consenting adults" idea by stating that there exists no pair of consenting adults where the buyer can actually know whether the seller is consenting.