Debates
Should prostitution be legalised?
Should prostitution be legalised?
4th October 2010
The much talked about topic of legalising prostitution is one that shatters the brains of many, so the debate held last week was indeed divided and interesting to say the least. It was an impressive turnout for the first debate of the year, with practically all the seats in the PAC filled with eager students. Talking in favour of this argument was second year Meggan Jarvis, as well as a very brave and confident first year, Saffy Creed. Arguing against the motion were Stephen Sherwood and Katie Jackson.
Meggan began the debate with the argument that ‘there is always room for it’, and therefore, legalising it would make the highly dangerous profession a lot safer for the women involved. She argued that street walkers are most at risk and legalising the job would give these women a safer place to work. By legalising prostitution, women would be more inclined to inform the police regarding physical abuse that occurs in this industry. The much talked about topic of pimps also came into Meggan’s argument, as she explained how the workers are often beaten by their ‘owners’ and by legalising the profession women wouldn’t need to be working for pimps, as it would all be government regulated.
Also in favour of the motion was Saffy, her main argument similarly being the safety of the women. She argued that, with the profession currently being illegal, the spread of STDs cannot be monitored, and legalising the job could ultimately decrease the number of diseases spread.
However the opposing side had some very fair points expressing their reasons as to why prostitution should stay illegal. Katie was next to speak and her argument focused more on the individuals involved in prostitution, taking quite a feminist approach, as well as the moral side of the debate. She stated quite simply that the women involved were unhappy; 75% attempted suicide according to statistics, so why would the government choose to support such an organisation that unhappy women participated in? In relation to her feminist approach, she argued quite simply that legalising the profession would ‘not be dignifying women’ and ‘the stigma will never be removed’. References to other countries were also stated in her argument; In Amsterdam, where prostitution has been legal since the early 19th century, it has gone too far, according to their government. She stated that the number involved in prostitution has risen by 25%, and therefore, legalising the profession in the UK could have the risk of actually increasing the number involved. Stephen, also arguing against the motion, stated the simple, yet truthful, argument that legalising prostitution would encourage women to become prostitutes, therefore increasing the chances of it ultimately becoming a norm in our society. Indeed now, this seems such an implausible circumstance, but Stephen argued that it is a possibility.
After each speaker had their say, it was question time. Due to the vast amounts of questions asked by the audience, it was obvious the speakers had left an impression and the debate had been particularly interesting. Just a few examples of questions asked: "You mentioned the fact that the number of people carrying STDs would drop, could you explain how?" Saffy answered this question: "If the UK were to legalise prostitution, the government would be able to regulate the women involved and they would be able to take specific tests when informed, making it a lot safer for the women involved."
The majority of the questions were asked to Saffy and Meggan, the girls in favour of the motion: "Your argument implies that prostitutes want to be prostitutes, but I don’t think this is the case, I think a lot of it is down to drugs, so why legalise it?" Meggan responded with the view that, "legalising the profession would make it easier for the women to get out of the cycle." A point was also made to both sides: "I’m quite surprised that none of the speakers have mentioned the religious aspects to this debate," however, to most of the speakers this was seen as pretty irrelevant, and Meggan responded by stating its insignificance to the debate. A few questions were asked to the side against the motion, such as: "Would you not agree that legalising prostitution would make women feel a lot more comfortable and may decrease their chances of getting badly judged?" Katie answered this question and explained that: "The stigma attached to the profession will never be removed."
The questions did get fairly heated and managed to cause a stir amongst the audience as well as the speakers. But due to limited time, the debate came to an end after a good 40 minutes of discussion. Marco asked for the audience to take their vote. It was a very close call, but it was decided that the side opposing the motion received more votes. The debate was a brilliant start to the new college year and we hope the audience members will increase as the year continues.