The Dutch experiment with legalized prostitution has been a disaster
Pimps, under legalisation, have been reclassified as managers and businessmen. Abuse suffered by the women is now called an ‘occupational hazard’, like a stone dropped on a builder’s toe. Sex tourism has grown faster in Amsterdam than the regular type of tourism: as the city became the brothel of Europe, women have been imported by traffickers from Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia to meet the demand. In other words, the pimps remained but became legit — violence was still prevalent but part of the job, and trafficking increased. Support for the women to leave prostitution became almost nonexistent. The innate murkiness of the job has not been washed away by legal benediction.
The Dutch government hoped to play the role of the honourable pimp, taking its share in the proceeds of prostitution through taxation. But only 5 per cent of the women registered for tax, because no one wants to be known as a whore — however legal it may be. Illegality has simply taken a new form, with an increase in trafficking, unlicensed brothels and pimping; with policing completely out of the picture, it was easier to break the laws that remained. To pimp out women from non-EU countries, desperate for a new life, remains illegal. But it’s never been easier.
Legalisation has imposed brothels on areas all over Holland, whether they want them or not. Even if a city or town opposes establishing a brothel, it must allow at least one — not doing so is contrary to the basic federal right to work. To many Dutch, legality and decency have been irreconcilably divorced. It has been a social, legal and economic failure — and the madness, finally, is coming to an end.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
No fun if it’s legal.
OldEnglish on February 19, 2013 at 9:48 PM
I never understood how feminism could call such things empowerment.
rob verdi on February 19, 2013 at 9:49 PM
Proof positive, if you want something screwed up, get the government involved…
/s
Hog Wild on February 19, 2013 at 9:49 PM
How dare you impose your values on me you closed minded Christian white male. Or something.
MikeknaJ on February 19, 2013 at 9:55 PM
Seems to be working OK in Nevada.
Mark1971 on February 19, 2013 at 10:00 PM
Hey, I thought that the ‘new’ Republican party didn’t want the SoCons anymore. Lol. Wonder when they’ll learn. Whats hilarious is that in Holland, they’ll have to allow the brothels, cos it the Federal Right to WORK. Jeez, thats some convoluted thinking right there.
tommy71 on February 19, 2013 at 10:11 PM
Poor implementation of freedom.
astonerii on February 19, 2013 at 10:15 PM
They never wanted social Cons. It has been an uneasy marriage since SoCons came out of the closet with the Moral Majority.
chemman on February 19, 2013 at 10:17 PM
Gee, it’s almost as if our backwards-thinking forebears actually knew what they were doing when they outlawed it hundreds of years ago. Who knew?
Socratease on February 19, 2013 at 10:22 PM
I’m a free market social conservative. Preach and change hearts outside the blunt hand of government. Big statists on both sides are sickening.
Chubbs65 on February 19, 2013 at 10:48 PM
Another government idea with unintended consequences. Gee, where have we heard that before?
Christian Conservative on February 19, 2013 at 10:52 PM
So would the blunt hand of government force communities to have brothels and crack houses because that’s ‘freedom’, or would they be allowed to ban them?
sharrukin on February 19, 2013 at 10:52 PM
changing lives and
improvingruining socieities all over the world.thanks liberals.
ted c on February 19, 2013 at 10:55 PM
Prostitution is legal in practically every country in Western civilization including the US except where there were traditionally a lot of transient sailors who could transmit disease globally. Germany doesn’t have this problem. Nevada doesn’t have this problem. Heck, prostitution was only made illegal in most US cities in the 20th century and only then because we didn’t have antibiotics at the time and GIs were getting VD in wartime.
Making prostitution illegal does not eliminate prostitution. It simply drives the profit from it to organized crime or makes the women subject to exploitation from pimps because they can’t report their problem to police without incriminating themselves. Same with problems of abuse and robbery by clients. Making prostitution illegal actually causes a lot of the human trafficking problems we see in some areas because the prostitutes can not come forward.
Why would someone need to go to Holland to see a hooker? Prostitution is legal in practically every country in Western Europe (Ireland, UK, Spain, Portugal, France, Belgium, Netherlands, Germany, Denmark, Poland, Austria, Switzerland, Italy, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, etc.) and Canada, and Nevada in the US (in some counties).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_by_country#Europe
There must be a different reason why the Dutch issue has been a “disaster” while all of these other countries have had legal prostitution for decades and don’t have these problems. My guess is that the Amsterdam Red Light District is the cause of the problem. It has been PROMOTED as a prostitution destination. When you have something that is promoted as a tourist attraction, it will naturally attract tourists and anything that attracts tourists will attract unsavory characters who will attempt to part them from as much as their money as possible.
It isn’t the prostitution itself that is the problem in Holland that is the problem, it is the red light district. That needs to be shut down, in my opinion.
crosspatch on February 19, 2013 at 10:55 PM
Same here, I agree 100%.
Kjeil on February 19, 2013 at 10:58 PM
A better question is to ask how the blunt hand of government has improved things or has ever stopped local prostitution or crackhouses… SoCons are like the entitlement crowd, they never check the damn scoreboard. Driving people underground has done so much for humanity. Dead cops and their broken families. Abused, raped, and Killed women. etc.. If we ever are going to drive down net pain and suffering in this world, then we need to accept that our finite resources are better off going after real sick bastards in these industries and not the consumer level criminals that will always be with humanity. time to face reality.
Chubbs65 on February 19, 2013 at 11:07 PM
So you would send in the police to force the local community to let brothels and crack houses be built.
sharrukin on February 19, 2013 at 11:12 PM
The problem is the Dutch decided to not enforce the laws that are still on the books, like trafficking, assault, etc. And hello:
I didn’t realize legalizing prostitution meant you had to legalize abuse as well. It’s almost like they wanted it to fail or something. I’m guessing the Dutch could muck up a wet dream if given the opportunity.
xblade on February 19, 2013 at 11:24 PM
It is extremely rare for a community to be of one mind. Are you saying that unruly mobs that adopt the title of ‘the community’ are justified to hinder private property use? You sound like a big statist.
Chubbs65 on February 19, 2013 at 11:38 PM
If they don’t want it in their town then why should your thugs be forcing it on them? All hail the Central Planning Committee and their plan for our future happiness?
I am not the one demanding we send in the stormtroopers…you are.
sharrukin on February 19, 2013 at 11:45 PM
Well, community zoning is much better than outright state law. Federalism in action! Again, why should we allow a mob of locals totally stop people from using their land as they see fit with some zoning respected. Private vs. public thugs= all storm troopers in there own way. Big statists always coopt authority (legal or moral) and push their will on others. You adopt ‘the community’ authority, as if your moral compass should take precedence over individual’s rights…
Chubbs65 on February 19, 2013 at 11:55 PM
You’re the one sending in the stormtroopers to force them to accept brothels and crack houses.
You are the one imposing your moral compass on a community that wants nothing to do with what you think is moral. You are willing to do so at the point of a gun.
The problem is that someone’s moral standard is going to be applied and you think it should be yours.
sharrukin on February 20, 2013 at 12:02 AM
And if an individual’s moral compass is the final arbiter then you would accept a nine-year old being involved in prostitution and sexual relationships because that is the accepted age according to Sharia law. I am sure you wouldn’t want to impose your religious beliefs or moral standards on an individual so that would be fine?
sharrukin on February 20, 2013 at 12:21 AM
You are assuming things. Only time I would advocate police action is when you infringe upon the property owner’s rights. I’m not imposing my morality either. That is a dishonest framing of my argument. I believe in property rights with some caveats (like zoning.). Due to my morality, I wouldn’t support either in their free market attempts.
Chubbs65 on February 20, 2013 at 12:22 AM
And the nine-year olds? You wouldn’t be imposing your moral precepts on them would you?
sharrukin on February 20, 2013 at 12:26 AM
And the straw men arguments? You wouldn’t be discussing this topic disingenuously with such high moral standards, would you? Consenting adults is what we are talking about.
Chubbs65 on February 20, 2013 at 12:47 AM
A nine-year old IS a consenting adult under Sharia law. Unless you are going to impose your moral idea about what is right and proper on others, then they should be able to make their own choices right? Why should your moral standard take precedent over theirs?
sharrukin on February 20, 2013 at 12:53 AM
Well, if a state ever goes sharia law, all bets are off. But it’s disingenuous to bring it up as an argument till then.
MetaThought on February 20, 2013 at 2:16 AM
They must have run out of French women.
trl on February 20, 2013 at 2:30 AM
If you aren’t going to impose your preferred morality on the individual then why is it disingenuous? It is one moral option for an individual as valid as any other if individual moral choices are the final arbiter.
If as you are suggesting, the state will impose its moral choices on the individual, or the community, then why are brothels and crack houses the moral choice to be imposed by force on communities?
sharrukin on February 20, 2013 at 5:30 AM
Some choices have negative effects. Therefore we need the government to ban those choices to protect us.
Signed,
Barack Obama and American Spectator
AngusMc on February 20, 2013 at 6:56 AM
The article is from the British magazine Spectator not the American Spectator.
That being said, kind of a strange world anymore where thinking that legalized prostitution maybe isn’t the best idea makes you some kind of raving Social Conservative and/or oppressive “statist”.
Dreadnought on February 20, 2013 at 8:35 AM
If prostitution was actually illegal jewelry stores would all go out of business.
meci on February 20, 2013 at 8:36 AM
Preview for the US, substitute pot, immigration, or gun safety. On deck, Obamacare.
roy_batty on February 20, 2013 at 8:51 AM
Is this the same nation that also tried legalized pot and found out, golly gee whiz, THAT wasn’t such a brilliant idea either?
Ayeah, it’s one thing not to be a flaming SoCon, but God forbid you make any effort to keep your hometown/city from becoming a haven for the worst kinds of humanity, or ‘impose’ (what whiny BS) any level of morality whatsoever.
And if we’re really lucky we’ll get the first three within short order of each other.
MelonCollie on February 20, 2013 at 12:10 PM
The goal of course to crash the system so it can be rebuilt to perfection.
/forward, utopia!
roy_batty on February 20, 2013 at 12:19 PM
That or sledgehammer it into a new shape while everyone’s too busy getting stoned or laid. I am desperately trying to point out to conservatives that if enough people wring their brains out on newly-legalized drugs, any chance we have of reform goes flying off with the angels.
MelonCollie on February 20, 2013 at 12:25 PM