The newspapers just love publishing stories about prostitution, because they know it sells. Amanda Goff aka Samantha X has been giving them plenty of fuel. Of course these stories all have comments left open, and it’s only a matter of time before a certain argument comes up in one form or another. Here’s an example of it, as found in a comment on a Fairfax newspaper site:
My argument against prostitution isn’t based on religion, conservative values or prudishness, but is more to do with the fact that, in essence, prostitutes are being bribed to have sex with someone they don’t actually want to have sex with. One wants sex and the other doesn’t. Some may protest that they do want the sex, but what if no money was involved? That’s right. The sex wouldn’t happen.
This “argument” is absolutely absurd. Do the people making it really not see the glaring flaw? How about we do a simple substitution:
My argument against garbage collection isn’t based on religion, conservative values or prudishness, but is more to do with the fact that, in essence, garbage collectors are being bribed to collect garbage they don’t actually want to collect. One wants garbage collected and the other doesn’t. Some may protest that they do want to collect garbage, but what if no money was involved? That’s right. The garbage wouldn’t be collected.
You can apply it to most occupations. If no money was involved, the roads wouldn’t be maintained, the supermarket shelves wouldn’t be stacked, the garbage wouldn’t be collected, nothing would be manufactured, and society as we know it wouldn’t exist. I’m not trying to make a case for or against prostitution, I’m just completely sick of seeing this absolutely stupid argument smugly parroted over and over again.
