Yes

by Michael Patrick

Created on: July 16, 2008

Prostitution should be decriminalized. We can't effectively "legalize" it any more than we can legalize love or pain or masturbation. The definition of prostitution is the performance of sex for money. Okay, so is the exchange of sex for power, influence, glory, a promotion, a job, college tuition, as a reward after a nice dinner, or the ability to buy a loaf of bread exempt from the taint of prostitution? If the john offers a bag of groceries instead of cash, is the hooker off the hook for prostitution?

There is a very thin line between the young man who is "chartered" to accompany an executive woman in town for a business trip and accompanies her to dinner and a concert and ends up in her hotel room bed, and the inner city "ho" who plies her body to make ends meet because she has no other marketable skills. We must remember that prostitution isn't the exclusive domain of underprivileged women but is a fact for both sexes.

Long before the word "prostitute" was coined with all its negative connotations, men and women exchanged sexual favors for all kinds of reasons from basic survival to personal gain. The real question is how or why the age-old practice became "illegal" in the first place. Men, undisputed leaders in the purchase of sex, still leap to the pulpit or podium to legislate against it. What's up with that? Does guilt lead social doctrine?

In 1920, the 18th Amendment to the US Constitution prohibited drinking alcohol in a futile attempt to restrict human behavior. In 1933 the amendment was repealed by the 21st Amendment. Good lesson. The edicts of Christian outrage and the pandering of self-righteous politicians to make sex outside of marriage illegal are futile. Past decades of spurious legislation have treated us to the incredible fallacy of laws that define what is "proper" sex and what isn't. One has to wonder if this constipated posturing is a result of erectile dysfunction or if sex is so fearsome that it must be officially regulated. Freud postulated that sexual repression is the root of all evil. Kinsey studied the phenomenon, found that most American men and women admitted to extra-marital relationships, and started his own free-love mini-culture. Now we have Viagra.

Is it possible that our opposition to prostitution is our fear of inadequacy? Do husbands fear their performance isn't pleasuring their wives? Do women fear their attentions aren't keeping their husbands satisfied? Are we afraid that we're insensitive to the sexual needs of our spouses and want to eliminate all competition?

The argument is difficult to condense into less than 1500 words and harder to face. That someone else, a perfect stranger in fact, may provide a sexual act for someone we love that we can't or won't perform, is offensive and frightening. It makes us question our beliefs and our self-worth and attacks the foundations of our personal security.

We all want to be the perfect mate. We all want to feel we're everything our mate could ever desire. We invest everything we can but, alas, few of us are able to rise to that perfect standard. When it becomes evident that we aren't quite the end-all and be-all for our mates, rather than alter our attitudes, we look to religion or law to protect us.

Neither the US Constitution nor the Christian Bible prohibits prostitution. Our Founding Fathers were either too stupid or too smart to say that sex has anything to do with forming a more perfect union. The Ten Commandments are interesting in that the 7th Commandment says a man must not commit adultery with a married woman who is not his wife. The 10th Commandment says a man must not covet another man's wife. Neither prohibits any man from sex with another man or an unmarried woman, nor any woman from sex with anyone of either gender regardless of marital status.

Historically, religions and many societies have frowned on the unfettered exchange of sexual favors for gain because it may take advantage of the frailty of human intercourse (no pun intended). In the context of social comity, it's reasonable to encourage fidelity as a unifier of the family and to discourage coveting another's spouse, but it's difficult to justify laws that prohibit sex between consenting beings.

Protestant theology came to America with John Calvin who believed that the strength to deny all pleasure was the key to Eternal Life. He declared that sex should restricted to childbearing and even denounced all but the "missionary position" during which the wife lay in rigid solicitude while the husband held his nose as he ejaculated. Calvin felt that denial of sexual (and other) pleasure would make one more pure to Saint Peter. Even today, facets of Christianity restrict adherents from eating certain foods, listening to music, or dancing. Calvin was both charismatic and wrong.

Sexual repression hasn't improved the culture. We have Christian priests who bugger young boys, leading Evangelists who have gay relations and multiple sexual encounters with underage girls, and millions of the devout who fear the Wrath of God if they have a glass of wine or enjoy sex, even with their spouses. We have Muslim men who drink and whore when away from their homelands and Muslim women who aspire (Allah forbid) to an education.

The idea that if we live our lives in pain we will be granted Eternal Bliss is antithetic to human experience. It's curious that both Christianity and Islam, the two biggest religions in the world with half the global population in their thrall, are adamantly opposed to pleasure.

God, in His infinite wisdom, gave us the capacity for pleasure, and particularly that of sex to stimulate the growth of the species. He didn't set terms and conditions, He said, "Go forth and multiply." He didn't rely on His command alone, He made sexual desire one of the strongest urges in all living beings.

We really do have to take a step back here and look at the world's "oldest profession" in a more self-aware light. It is futile to exhaust our emotions and our best intentions on a debate of whether to legalize a fact of life.

"We can't legislate morality," my Dad told me. "Where human instinct is involved, we can observe and define it, we can advise and guide it, but we can't remake God's will."

Learn more about this author, Michael Patrick.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.