Free casual encounter best brothels New South Wales

free casual encounter best  brothels New South Wales

It has historically been the centre of liberated, unpretentious and free-thinking people — a place where offbeat oasis of comfort and pleasure took a new pitch on the oldest profession. Above are some of the top brothels, massage parlours, escorts in Adelaide.

It may even be full of churches but the city has benefited from multiculturalism via exquisite cuisines, art, music and little hidden bars that will blow your mind. Plan a wonderful outing with an Adelaide escort to the annual Adelaide Fringe Festival where people from all walks of life and all corners of the globe come to be part of the festival every year. Play a round of roulette or enjoy a few hands of Blackjack at the Adelaide Casino.

Experience the rich history of Adelaide and Australia at the South Australia Museum, the Art Gallery of South Australia and the Migration Museum where there are always a string of interesting exhibits on display.

Maybe you want to do all of those things with a lovely private escort Adelaide can take care of the companion you seek. You can explore the native wildlife animals and humans with an Adelaide escort for hire to keep you company. The Adelaide escorts can share these adventures with you as a companion, a girlfriend experience or more. Some sex workers in Adelaide, South Australia, take pride in their work because they feel their work is an important service to the community.

Adelaide swingers scene can be explored through some of the Adelaide brothels. You can hire the most exclusive escorts in Adelaide to come to you or you can visit them. A lot of Adelaide brothels are commonly found in the city centre or square depending on how you look at it and they have a selection of stunning escorts who offer in-call and out-call services. However some of the best brothels Adelaide has on offer can be found in the most discreet locations outside the CBD.

History lesson of Adelaide sex: Sex workers and their advocates have been attempting to pass legislation to decriminalise sex work in South Australia in the past few years with no success. Regulation in the sex industry and sex work will only be beneficial for both workers and clients of these workers purely for the fact that it could result in the brothels being managed like any other business with requirements and compliances for health and safety regulations.

However, sex workers and brothels in Adelaide still flourish with business albeit in a criminalised environment. One sex worker gave an interview to ABC news stating that they are supported wholeheartedly by SA Health and the government in general.

So when it comes to prostitution, brothels and massage parlours, Adelaide and South Australia has a very funny way of governing it. So if you want to visit a brothels Adelaide locals will tell you to ask for private escorts instead.

My Playmate is your first point of contact when you seek premium escorts, brothels, massage parlours and more in the city of Adelaide. The highest quality establishments and erotic companions are waiting on My Playmate to cater to your specific tastes and fantasies.

The independent escorts in Adelaide are some of the most beautiful escorts in Australia who will make your fantasies a reality and give you an experience to remember. If I describe my work as 'intellectual exploitation', it's strictly accurate - my employer is using my intellect for their own gain - but maybe not probative, in that I'm paid rather well to have my intellect exploited.

You can't just assert that sex work is qualitatively different to other forms of work. You have to prove it. What's the qualitative difference? What's so special about sex, compared to raw physical labour, or raw intellectual labour, or other work that carries significant workplace safety implications?

You have, of course, completely dodged the points about other jobs. I would like to add that soldiers are paid to murder for a living; and, nobody is seriously suggesting that we end the exploitation of these poor men and a few women. That is due to the fact the industry is in need of being legalised and regulated so that appropriate protections associated with occupational health and safety can be implemented.

Joe - In your strange world, how can you even disagree with me? My choice is to be respected. My choice impacts on others. With sex work, a persons choice necessarily impacts on the sisterghodo worldwide. I'd protest DJs etc if the profession meant youth were enslaved and sold.

I'd protest Rugby League if participants were coerced into it. You have this utopian vison where if we just legalised and regulated it, the world would be a happy place, when evidence from Germany etc suggests this is not the case and 2 very secular countries have decided not to tolerate it anymore.

Violence is not incidental to prostitution and neither is illness and neither is white slavery and neither is general misery - they are the rule not the exception for most of the world, and you want to accept that and think you're progressive????? Joel, you're smuggling your conclusion into your premises.

You have to actually demonstrate that sex work consists of being 'enslaved and sold', in a usefully relevant sense, you have to actually demonstrate that violence is 'not incidental' to sex work and that there's a qualitative difference between sex work and other jobs that have not-incidental violence in the same sense, such as several sports, bouncers, the military, etc. There's a rather significant world-wide trade in drugs. It involves a lot of violence, causes a lot of illness, sometimes entails slavery or practices not much different.

But if I drop by the local pharmacy to hand in a prescription for some codeine, I'm not really participating in the same sort of thing the warlords of Afghanistan's poppy fields are engaged in, despite the product being basically the same.

Thinking that sex work could be like a pharmacy, instead of like the international drug trade, is not a fundamentally ridiculous idea. We live in a developed country, we have a functioning police force, and they should be able to handle people being imported or coerced into sexual slavery. Domestic violence, drug abuse, and a number of other diseases are rife in mining and agriculture too. Should we ban people from engaging in those activities as well? That will naturally solve the problem, right?

And you are absolutely right. Even pure intellectual work is the same sort of prostitution as being a sex worker. The only difference is that you sell access to a different body part, namely your brain. Sex work is on the dangerous side and hard. But it provides a service that there is an apparently never decreasing demand. In addition, it probably helps keeping sex-crime rates lower than they would be without prostitution.

So it is an occupation which actually should command some respect rather than ethics tirades from some imaginary moral high-horse. On the apropos of moral: So it's OK for a teenager to watch a woman's body in a pool of blood without her head on but it would completely ruin said teenager to see the same woman in a pool of water without her panties on.

But for some reason, asking girls to pay me for the privilege of my intimacy just annoys them. So in spite of my wishes to the contrary, I have to pursue it as a hobby and not a job. You have made some terrible assumptions about Jade, much to your own shame. As for your lame arguments. The reason the men and women involved in sex work are potentially subjected to violence from clients and people who exploit them for profit at times is not due to the work itself but simply due to the fact it is criminalised.

Once it is legalised and regulated the men and women who undertake such work can be afforded the work place protections that are appropriate for their occupational health and safety. It is people like you who continue to force sex workers into being criminals that causes them to be unable to obtain the appropriate occupational health and safety protections.

If you actually cared about them you would support legalisation and regulation but we know you don't actually give a damn about them and instead just want to force your bronze age religious beliefs on others. Now who is making assumptions?

The whoel articvle is about the Swedish model, an dif you did any thinking you'd see that supporting sexual exploitation isn't a good idea. Nordic model has less problems than outright prohibition, but it still has some very similar issues.

Say you were working in an industry, and you knew that if you went to the police there was a chance of you losing your job. Not going to jail or being charged, just losing your job. Say, also, that you really need this job - you don't have many other options, and you don't have significant savings. You'd think twice before going to the police with complaints in that situation, I think. Something similar goes on in the Nordic model.

Sure, a sex worker going to the police won't be arrested. But they might pay close attention to the people she interacts with on a regular basis - they're criminals, after all - and if it got out that that sex worker had talked to the police, their clientele is going to dry up - because people don't tend to like being arrested.

The end result is the same - less money for the sex worker. And if they're a sex worker because they need that money and that was the best option they can think of, they've taken a significant hit because they went to the police. This is a good point about potential of people not going to the police. But in fact the opposite has been shown to happen.

Evidence from Norway has shown that women in prostitution are much more likely to present to police and have reported harassment against them. The introduction of Nordic Model laws saw a decrease of reports of violent crime and sexual assault, but an increase in women in prostitution reporting verbal harassment, being spat on and other forms of physical and verbal harassment.

This shows that the system works and women feel like they will be taken seriously if they are harassed by punters. Interestingly evidence from NSW and NZ has shown that many people in the sex industry do not feel safe to present to police. The onus falls on women in the open slather sex trade jurisdictions to prove they have been wronged. As for those in Nordic model countries, the buyers are already doing something against the law and crimes against women in prostitution are taking seriously with no onus on needing to make distinctions as to what was agreed upon in the transaction of sex i.

Joel, I'm a software engineer. I make a pretty good amount of money. Instead of becoming a software engineer, I could have invested that time in becoming a lawyer, say. I have the intellectual chops to handle it, and I'd likely make more money now if I'd done that then. So I guess choosing to be a software engineer makes me not very bright. If you haven't figured it out yet, personal preferences are a thing, and they do matter, rather a lot.

By your logic James - any choice is valid so long as it is legal or even if it isn't, but falls within some "acceptable" limits sex work is illegal in many places. Also, paying to hunt large game is my preference so that's cool - paying to hurt someone so long as they consent is fine not at all weird and viewing kiddie porn so long as the kid said they were OK with that is fine as well. I mean, if they want to be hooker and you're OK with that, it's just work experience, isn't it? You should have been a lawyer with your moral outlook - you'd be in hot demand from the criminal underworld who are all innocent according to them as its all about personal preferencer, isn't it!

That wasn't my logic at all. I was explaining why somebody might not want to be a sex worker even if they theoretically would earn more money doing that without it implying they think there's something qualitatively different about sex work.

You were, after all, asking Jade why she doesn't take up sex work. The point is that I don't want to be a lawyer, not even for a substantial raise, and it's not because I think being a lawyer is a fundamentally awful practice that should be forbidden in all civilized societies.

My logic for why sex work should be legal is very simple: I don't see why not. You might want to explain why it should be illegal. With actual arguments, not just declarations that it's terrible and vile and exploitation. If you read into the Swedish model, there are very strong arguments as to why France and Sweden have adopted this, and its based on harm minimisation to the women.

In nations where prositution has been legal and controlled fo decades, it has fuelled and import based economy where women are trafficked into thje nation to make money for their pimps in a legal brothel, and kept quiet through corruption and violence.

The murder rate is far and away higher for prostitutes everywhere. Regulation has NOT made them happier - perhaps cleaner - but that is all.

All it has done has legitimised a man treating a woman like a facility and weakened respect fopr themj - like it has with you - where you think you are being nice to women by saying "I support your right to be disrespected.

Novperson has self respect who prostitutes themself sexually. It is not empowering - it is degrading no matter how clean and organised it is. Do just a little reading, and you'll see the "Scarlett Alliance" are the minority - the majority of women worldwide are exploited by this industry.

To me, your argument is like "a coke dealer is OK 'cause the people who use it are free to choose and he doesn't force it on anyone and they aren't hurting anyone and if it was regulated it'd be cheaper and safer" while ignoring the terrible violence in Mexico and Columbia that sustains the supply.

You'd then say "but if it was legal that would go away" and ignore that the suppliers then devote their economy to satisfying the urges of the wealthy West. Finally - you assume that free choice is a noble ideal and it's not - its only good in relation to higher aspirations - it is not an end in itself.

The commercial sex lobby are being disingenuous in their claims that there is no difference between sex and sport or office work. How many senior executives sell their bodies for sex? How many sports stars? I agree with the Bishop on this one and support his points about the "Swedish Model". It is time to place the locus of the issue on the buyers of sex. I also agree that prostitution is a throwback to the slave market. Look at the fate of women and children in contemporary war zones trafficked, abused and sold into prostitution.

Look at the numbers of people in our society who are forced by economic circumstance into something that they might otherwise not have to do if given a real choice in life, one supported by a decent standard of housing, healthcare and education. I didn't actually read the Jade defended prostitution. I did read that she rightly compared to coal miners.

You Joel are the one clouding the exchange by introducing a sense of guilt or shame to the act of prostitution. A form of employment undertaken by all sexes since the dawn of time. As to your question about work for the dole, there would no doubt be those who would choose sex work as opposed to painting a fence.

Not everyone thinks as you do. It seems to be assumed here in the comments that Jade is a female.. Jade might even be a Trans I read this comment in full - but I stopped really thinking about it when I read the elusion to "liking sex" and being a sex worker. That in itself displays such a chasmic break in reality, that I can't actually get my head around it.

Especially within the context of the Article. Which, as Jade point's out is nice and "straylian" in the fact it doesn't mention males.

I think many people here have a very rose tinted vision of sex work. My own reaction to this article was similar to mush that is said in the relies here. I only differ from Avargo in criticising the author for limiting the article to prostitutes. It would take a book, not a short article, to explore all the situations where 'consent' is not consent and employment is slavery. The article is a good start though. By taking a stark example it allows us to expand the issue to other areas.

And wage slavery, particularly in dangerous or grossly under-paid work, are indeed proper extensions of this matter. Now we need to consider how we should act on all forms of exploitation and slavery, where we can act.

Well said Jade, as a woman I completely agree. I would add that nowhere in Jensen's piece does he mention who seeks out sex workers, and for what reasons. Instead there is an assumption that men are the only ones - they aren't - and that they inherently exploit the poor down trodden woman - many of whom make the informed decision to enter the trade.

This is far from the case. A family member of mine worked in an industry caring for the disabled as a part of her duties she was sometimes required to recruit the services of sex workers for her clients. These were fully adult males that had NEVER had a normal and healthy sexual relationship with a woman, this in addition to their disability had an enormous effect on their mental health. My family member said she respected them even more than some of her fellow carers - who in some cases looked down their noses on the sex workers.

This is just one example of certain group who seek out sex workers for one set of reasons. As Jade points out all work is coercive to a point. Sex work should be the same as any other profession, heavily regulated to ensure worker safety.

A child being exploited is NOT a sex worker, but a victim and to equate the this with adult sex workers is disingenuous. Both of these situations are wrong. However to say that all prostitution is exploitation is as irrational as saying the all work is exploitation. But for my need to eat, feed my children and pay my mortgage I would not be a work. I am forced to work but I an not exploited. SimonP38, You have correctly identified that 'sex work' and 'exploitation' are very separate issues.

Exploitation is combated by legalising and regulating the industry and ensuring appropriate regulations and occupational health and safety standards are met. The Swedes agree with Dr Jenson that prostitution can never be consensual, and under newly legislated laws, men who pay for prostitutes can be charged with rape.

Thanks for the response and support guys! I really appreciate it, and am a little overwhelmed by the positive response. Legalisation, regulation and all the state protections to the workers that result is what is required. Not more criminalisation which only provides income to organised crime syndicates. You are way way off beat in likening the act of someone entering somebody elses body as akin to working in a coal mine.

Behind that act is a whole history of sex that is embedded deeply in a women's psyche and has come from the days when we had no power in our lives. But never mind the history of humanity, because the history of sex workers is enough evidence to prove that using a sex worker has severe moral implications for the purchaser. If you care to invest some time on research into studies done you will find that a very high percentage of sex workers including male ones were sexually or otherwise abused as children.

Ans psychological evidence to prove that many are trapped in a permanent cycle of abuse when they work in a sex industry. So basically, when you purchase sex you are damaging that person more. There are men and women who enjoy the lifestyle and do it for that reason and the money.

But how will you know that they are mentally healthy and that you are not just perpetuating the damage wrought by the uncle or father who crept into their bed at night? The article has not stressed this enough, but i think that is the point of it. I understand you reference to enslavery of work, everybody could. But sex is different, it carries a whole baggage of history that sits on the shoulders of the person working in the industry.

Jade, if your argument is valid, should our legal system treat rape any more harshly than another assault with a similar amount of actual physical damage? You need to consider your question more thoroughly. Rape is not consent. It is a complete assault of a person, whether a cut or bruise is obvious or not.

A punch is an assault too. Tell me polony if offered the choice of a rape or a punch, and you had no choice but to choose one, which one would you choose? The thing is Jade, a coalminer does not have penetration and ejaculation into or over their body as part of their job requisite. Also, you make the rookie mistake of conflating prohibition with abolition. Prohibition is illegal prostitution, whereas the Nordic Model sees prostitution as the human rights violation that it is.

The pimps and johns are penalised under Nordic Model Law, not the prostituted person. Many spin this 'just decriminalsie it. It's like marijuana, of it is decriminalised it will stop crime' - well, women and we know it is mainly women who are bought in the legal and illegal sex-trade are not marijuana, we are not drugs, we are human beings Alcohol is not abused when one drinks it, marijuana is not harmed when one smokes it- we ARE harmed when we are used and abused by men, paid or not.

Nor does full legalisation or decriminalisation make it safer. Prosituted people do not come forward, stigma is still a problem because men who buy us for sex do the stigmatising. Slavery still exists but were the abolitionists wrong to take the stand they did? Groups like the Scarlet Alliance offer ZERO exiting strategies for anyone who wants to leave prostitution, yet are treated like they care about 'sex workers'- if by sex workers they mean johns, pimps and procurers then that is certainly true.

There is also a meme going around showing two people saying that in a capitalist society no one has 'meaningful consent 'in any job- 'except for 'sex workers. We must respect their agency'. It is hilariously and sadly spot refelctive of how a neoliberal society hides it's head in the sand when it comes to the reality of sex-trade.

The thing is Jade and the scripted responders - full decriminalisation is proven to expand the trade in people who do not want to be in the industry, so why should legislation, which gives men open slather to compensate us for their sexual abuse of us, be given priority over those desperate to leave, and those forced and coerced in to prostitution?

But then, as Thatcher said, "there is no such thing as a society, only individuals. By the way, I'd like to abolish coal mining too, but that should not entail penalising the workers. If a woman who doesn't want to do sex work is sufficiently desperate that she would do sex work, but sex work is effectively abolished - not because it's illegal, something Nordic that means there are very few buyers etc.

It's a shitty situation to be in, but removing the sex work option leaves them worse off. Now they have to pick the next least objectionable option, whatever it is. What does being penetrated or ejaculated on have to do with qualitative differences? Plumbers probably get dirty in a variety of unpleasant ways.

Are you comparing murder rates for coal miners with murder rates for sex workers? Murder rates for sex workers against average murder rates for the populace? But here's the thing: I don't believe your numbers. You might want to actually quote a reliable source.

Radfems do have something of a history of making grandiose claims they can't really back up. Are your numbers for sex workers in a country where it's illegal? What kind of regulations? What happens to the effect if you control for poverty?

For example, I'd find it plausible that the poorest people in society have a greatly elevated rate of mental illness including PTSD and are more likely to be murdered, and that sex workers disproportionately draw from the poorest people in society.

Because if it's the latter, abolishing sex work only makes the matter worse! And how many soldiers get PTSD? How much more likely are they to die than the average person? I'd add nursing into the list of professions that have to deal with unwanted bodily fluids and police into the list of professions that have a high risk of murder and PTSD. I value and admire them all. Have you ever spent time working under ground in a coal mine or any mine?

What about those in Asia and Africa who are forced into the diamond and other gem mining areas? What about the guys who spent weeks trapped alive here in Tasmania I think. Give me free choice and I would be swinging from a Mango tree, only there aren't enough to go around.

Though I would say that there's a fairly good case that we can't actually give free consent to work, especially if we're currently jobless as the government can suspend your payments for refusing a reasonable job but also more generally in the context of economics.

The problem is that pundits like Dr Jensen only have an issue with this when it comes to sex and sex work. Regardless, this is all part of a bigger discussion on consent and coercion "free", "informed", etc. You have said everything I would have said to the moralising author of the article. In a effort to support themselves those who work in the sex industry, male and female, should at least be offered the same protections as any other worker, not marginalised and made illegal.

Jade, I agree with the points you made. Thank you for putting these across so articulately. I am a well educated 50 year old woman, and I've worked in a variety of senior corporate roles in my career. I had a change of pace for 8 years when I was 30, however, and was a private sex worker. I approached this job as I approached every other job- with a high standard of professionalism. I was good at my work, and was paid well.

I stayed in the sex industry for as long as it suited me, then left to return to a previous career. I took full precautions to mitigate risks. I felt valued for the service I could bring to many people who, for whatever reasons, felt the need to have to buy sex. Interestingly, I believe that sex workers do more to keep couples together than counselling in situations where there is a lack of balance in sex drives of each partner. As a client once said to me, his wife was free to chose not to have sex very often.

However, that was not HIS choice, and he wanted equal freedom to chose to have sex more often. As he pointed out, if he had an affair, it was likely that someone would be hurt as emotions would become involved. Therefore, he chose to buy sex professionally. It was discreet, his needs were met, and no-one was hurt. Generally, my clients were courteous, reasonable and very clear that they were purchasing sexual services, often as their fantasies.

They paid me well, and many came to see me regularly. They also respected the boundaries I made. If I had those years again, would I make the same choice to work in the sex industry? I enjoyed that time of my life and have no regrets.

And yes, I was a fully consenting, informed party of the sexual encounters. Jade you talk of clouded views of labour and moralistic views of sexuality. If we are to treat the sex industry and so called 'sex work' as a legitimate service industry then we need to challenge the stigma and discrimination created by punters. Specifically brothels need to have gender quotas, we need to ensure that it is about experience and not who the punter deems to most desirable.

If you want oral sex it would be given by the person best placed to provide that service despite whether they are male, female, trans or whatever their body type, age or ethnicity.

Instead we need to make sure that they become legitimate employers with no discrimination of employees, all need to be on a wage with no differentiation between whether an individual services 7 clients while the other only services 2. As an individual I can not go to McDonalds and demand to be served by the skinny girl, nor can I go to the hospital and say I want my treating physician to be the size 6, mid 20's female doctor of Asian decent. Until we can eliminate the gender biases of the sex industry and system of discrimination and racism inherent in it, we really can not argue that this is a legitimate service industry like any other.

Good luck getting the pro-industry groups to support measures forcing punters and brothel owners to adhere to labour laws and anti-discrimination legislation. If we could all just get over our moralizing of those in the sex industry then there would be no stigma attached to prostitutes or pornstars and they would be far less likely to need to resort to drugs and self-destruction.

There's a very similar argument in how free we are to be Christians. If the choice of religion were really free then how is it that nearly every religious person here is a Christian, nearly every person in the ME is a Muslim, and nearly every person in India is a Hindu? At what point do we acknowledge that if there is any truth about religion then it is the truth that religion is not a free choice. How free are Muslims to be un-Muslim? How free is a child educated in a catholic school to not be Catholic.

I'm not talking here about cultural or community freedom - the pressure to conform is inescapable - but the ability to free oneself in one's own mind from the lifelong indoctrination in religious doctrine. Some prostitutes, I'm sure, feel this way about their role in the world: They have been beaten into submission. Many, I'm sure, feel otherwise: Life is made harder for them by the view of sex prostletused by men like Jensen, whose entire worldview is obsessed with other people's sex lives.

Jensen cares not one jot for the plight of women, sex workers, or indeed any other group whose life choices might make them vulnerable to the ideas men like him perpetrate. He only cares about his strict, pious outlook on the world and how we should all be obliged to live by it.

You don't know what Jensen does or doesn't care jots about. I don't think it fair for you say you do. I think it is counter to the principal of charity in critical thinking. But if frank criticism is the order of the day; can I just say I knew you were going to make this comment before you made it.

I thought the topic is broadly men's sense of entitlement to women's bodies; mitor will chime in early denying there's a problem. I think entitlement to women's bodies is more a feature of marriage than it is of prostitution, which seems to me to be more of a mutual transaction: The problem with prostitution is similar to the problem with drugs - prohibition, criminalisation, misinformation, pious finger pointing, and the general feeling that fun is sinful.

Moreover, the notion that an all powerful creator of the known universe and beyond has nothing better to do than obsess over what people do with their respective down stairs equipment is patently absurd. His writings show views consistent with his position and experience. I do not think it unreasonable to form an opinion, based upon his writing, on his views. Jensen claims to be concerned with victims. Jensen frames an argument from the perspective of eliminating harm to victims.

I think the decent think to do, is to address his stated concerns. And then present compelling evidence that Jensen doesn't give a jot. Can I give examples of evidence that might reveal someone doesn't give a jot about victims of sexual violence: In high profile sexual assault allegations they reflexively side with the alleged perp and decide the complainants are lying.

Or take the example offered in the article of the victim who was unable to say no to unwanted sex. This is quite common. This happened to many of my teenage friends in date-rape scenarios. The law says one must not do this. One has to try hard to establish consent.

I would imagine someone who did not give jot about victims would argue for a change in laws so that this form of sexual assault would no longer be illegal. This is not an article about date rape, it's an article about a religious man's idea of consent in the sex work industry. You could argue that someone who has been trafficked and is working in condition of slavery is not giving their consent regardless of the financial transaction.

I would agree with you. But it is neither sex nor prostitution that causes such situations to arise so easily - it is the pious, finger-pointy laws that surround sex work and consequently drive it into the hands of criminals that causes this.

Changes to these laws to make sex work legal, respectable and safe are doggedly resisted by men like Jensen. He doesn't want sex work to be safe for women. He wants it to be violent, dangerous and unpleasant. Each time a prostitute is murdered or plied with drugs or trafficked by the criminal underworld it is an incidence of divine retribution.

Jensen doesn't care about consent or women, he cares only about his holy book. Dr Jensen's comment about cannibalism was foolish and a straw man, because sexual consent generally does not allow killing or mutilation. Strangely, the usual suspects didn't pick up on that - rather, just went into his usual vitriolic rant and tried to change the topic. Whatever Dr Jensen's views on the morality of sexual liaisons and whether people agree with him or not, he is correct in pointing out that there is a dark side - a very dark side - to the prostitution industry, and on an international level, it does indeed involve slavery.

I sometimes get the impression that if Dr Jensen wrote an article reaffirming his belief in the value of human life, Mitor would advocate the decriminalisation of murder just to denounce any ideas associated with religion.

However that simply means there is a case for proper regulation of the industry to clean that out. And what is the cause? Or is it the stupid laws that push the entire industry into the hands of criminals?

How can anyone freely consent in the sex industry when to do so means breaking stupid laws? Jensen was claiming that consent is illusory in the sex industry, but his conclusion was that this is the only possible outcome in an industry built on sin.

I challenge that claim. Well said oh bold one. The point about freedom to be a particular religion is a good one. Surprising how it is lost on the religious however who cling to their own religion of Islam, Christianity in it's great variety of different flavours , or other faith, secure in the belief that they were lucky enough, to be born into the one true faith. Just a quick point - worth noting always that just like Christianity, Islam also comes in a wide variety of flavours.

Please educate me Filipio. I thought there were only 2 varieties of Islam. At last count there were 40, different of Christian. Depending what you're counting there up to five branches of Islam. Sunni, Shia and Sufis being the most well known. Think of them as Catholics, Orthodox, Protestant etc. It's not all that accurate but what the hell. Within each branch are further divisions, usually, but not always called schools.

Perhaps these can be likened to Lutherans, Anglicans, Methodists and so on. Each school, or equivalent is then divided into a myriad of movements, sects, organisations, bodies and branches that are different by their interpretation and weighting of scripture, but also different because we're talking different countries, different races, different languages and different cultures.

Islam is a different thing in Jakarta than it is in Mogadishu, for example. I'm notionally a Shafi'i Muslim, but you'll not mistake me for a Yemeni. Much like a fragmented Christianity, united and divided by a belief of the nature of Christ, so too a fragmented Islam is united and divided over most issues, because both were written by, made by and made for men.

Christianity has a unifying Christ, Islam has a unifying shahada. It seems the shahada is the creed that there is no god but God. That seems to be the jumping off point for deciding what that God requires.

Would you include the Druze and the Alawites as Islamic? The Yasidis seem to have been a little to liberal in their borrowings from other religions to come into that group. Curious to see the Shafi'i include some? I thought the Kurds were all closer to the Shia strand. It is belabouring the obvious to point out that all scriptures are written by men and that any claims for divine inspiration are untested. Thanks for that Dove, you have enlightened me enormously.

Just a little puzzled by your remark that you are - "notionally a Shafi'i Muslim" and then you go on to say that they were all made up by men. How do you maintain your faith given this? Thor, I am a Muslim and try to live a good life within certain parameters and guidelines. Whist there are particular values and perspectives that I hold because of this, this is not the same thing as believing in foundation myths or taking ancient texts as verbatim.

Most religious people do, but I don't belittle, mock or needlessly criticise their beliefs or their version of faith. I'm more interested in how people behave towards others and how their actions play out in real life. Religion isn't just the children's stories or the funny hats or wording of rituals.

It's about how people choose to life in the here and now- and the life I try to lead is totally compliant with the life people try to lead in Evangelical, Orthodox or Mormon Christianity.

Truth be known it's the same life people try to lead in Buddhism, Hinduism and Wiccanism. The Qur'an is an astonishing piece of literature and worthy of scholarship and even veneration. But it was written by men, is of a specific time, has a context and shouldn't be taken literally. The exhortations and commandments of the ancients shouldn't be viewed as contemporary instructions.

And you you can have this debate in a mosque, but like most things, you need right context. Some tact might help! OK, taking your reply at face value as sincere. A key issue here concerns what is meant by 'variety'. If you are referring to relatively formal demoninations, then certainly there are vastly more Christian denominations than Islamic ones.

And of course there are particular demoninations that might not be recognised by others or only partially as being Christian. In this specific sense, there are certainly more than two varieties of Islam -- I imagine you are thinking of Sunni and Shia, but one can add Sufi with parallels to Gnostic forms of Christian mysticism which stands somewhat apart from the Sunni-Shia axis, and also Ahmadiyya and Khawarij.

Historically there were others, arguably no longer existing. Each of these denominational 'umbrellas' have scores of distinct branches and sects. So even at this level there is quite a bit of diversity in how people 'do' Islam. But given a fairly clear doctrinal imperative to avoid overt divisions in what is again doctrinally envisaged as a single Islamic community, applying the notion of denomination is rather limited and misleading in relation to understanding 'variety' in Islam.

More important and accurate is paying attention to distinctive forms of collective practice of the religion by particular populations, who may well just refer to themselves as 'Muslims', or perhaps as Sunni.

Remember in the absence of a centralised ecclesiastical order, such as exists in most major Christian churches, local forms of Islamic leadership have proliferated over centuries, some more localised, some more national. The influence of pre-existing indigenous cultures is profound. So distinctive regional variants of Islamic practice -- of the sort that often attract description as a 'denomination' in Christianity -- abound.

This pushes the idea of 'varieties' of Islam out to number in the many, many thousands. Thanks for that Filipio. I suppose that when a religion is introduced to a different culture some modifications are inevitable. Christianity has had a lot of this in places like South America - some quite bizarre.

I guess what sets Christianity apart is the way it splinters into different groups in the same cultural background. America, the USA , is the spawning ground of so many. Luckily that's not the case here. There may be a cultural thing, but that's not a legal thing. I do like the line 'nearly every religious person here is a Christian', as it ignores those who don't have a religion which according to my memory of the census is getting larger.

As for a child within a catholic school, i'll expect they are doing the motions of doing whatever the rest of the class is doing, but I seriously doubt the school is keeping a count of which ones go to mass on the weekend, or how often they go to confessions. Or how many believe in the real presence in communions.

So I'll say 'not a lot' Now can you be a non catholic in a catholic school? I do know a Christian who worked in a muslim school as a teacher, so MAYBE there is no requirement to actually be catholic to go to a catholic school. He wrote it down? Perhaps part of what Mitor was pointing out is the fact that many people raised in a religious tradition have been truly brainwashed in the sense that any questioning of the faith was consistently meant with threats and rejection by family and community.

For example I know a few people who were raised in Muslim countries who said they learned from a very early age to dare not question religion or face the worst possible consequences.

By which I don't necessarily mean death, but complete ostracism from family, friends and community. Obviously they did not freely choose their faith under such circumstances. So Jensen should argue that religious indoctrination of children is child abuse and should be illegal. You were putting good arguments until the last paragraph, and then spoilt it all by nastiness. You do not know what Jensen cares about and it is not your place to judge another person's morals and motives.

Best stick to the message of the article and give up attacking the message. Connie41, You suggest that Mitor doesn't "know what Jensen cares about and it is not your place to judge another person's morals and motives" Actually Jensen makes his position abundantly clear in this opinion piece and in his early opinion pieces.

After all he is the rector at St Mark's Anglican Church and the position of the Anglican Church in relation to controlling the sexual activities of human beings is well defined and publically available. Just as Mr Jensen's opinions are clearly defined in his many opinions pieces for the Drum which can be viewed by clicking on his name above. What Mr Jensen clearly concerns himself with is not the welfare of sex workers or their clients but instead with the ability to proselytise and control the lives of other human beings with his religions doctrines and earn a living, as a Rector does, from the adherence to the said religion by other human beings via their tithes.

The greater danger to society and humans is not sex workers, their clients, or consensual sexual acts Throughout life, people have to make decisions; not all of which are wise. Some are out of need, greed and necessity; while others happen on the spur of the moment.

Selling one's own body is something that a woman has to live with, whether it be a one off time or a long time profession. When I was at university in the early 's in Melbourne, I worked part time as a waitress to pay for accommodation and other living expenses. I was born and raised in the country, so city life was new to me. One night after working a Friday night, the restaurant I worked in was fire bombed and destroyed in a gangland war.

I had no job then and no income. One of my roommates was a prostitute and she got me a job at a well known brothel in Melbourne. I worked nights a week during my final year at university. After leaving university, I got a job in the armed forces and quit my sex work. Twelve months later I was married and I am still happily married. I am not proud of the fact I sold my body as it was out of necessity.

I believe it made me a more understanding and a better woman for the experience. I might add that I was never into drugs and still clean in that respect. Drugs were rife even when I worked in the 's. Thank you for your story queenguinevere. I recently spoke with a woman who arrived in Australia as a refugee from Latin America, a single mother of three, and she chooses to work in the sex industry because that's the only way she can put food on the table for her family.

The real outrage in this situation is not that she does sex work, but that in one of the wealthiest countries in the world, in a time when the world has never been wealthier, people don't have more choices about the work that they do. Thank's for sharing your story queenguinevere - most touching and illustrative, of how life's experiences can push us in different directions. There is no black and white on the issue of prostitution, although I can see the value in making it legal, and having control over stopping the ratbags, from exploiting the vulnerable.

And, if as you say if it made you a more understanding and better woman then you should feel proud. Self improvement is on the core purposes of humans. I respect you and your choice. I am not judgmental of QG's choice but clearly there is a huge difference between the intimacy required in sex work and that involved in serving customers from behind a counter.

Sex work puts people at much more risk, by necessity it involves acts away from public scrutiny in isolated places. Some can handle themselves well where others would struggle. Sex work leaves a mental scar on many workers. I do not suggest banning it on that basis. There are no good solutions but to this outsider decriminalisation seems like the least worst solution. A Swedish model not that you suggested it makes it difficult for women to work in company and leaves them without the limited protection of fellow workers some of whom are also undoubtedly exploiters.

Have you ever used the words "I'm not proud" to describe any job you have ever engaged in. The difference you highlight between waitressing etc and the intimacy required and the vulnerability of the sex worker is valid and of primary concern. As you say, as matters stand now, mental scars are sometimes the result of sex worker's choice. So I make the choice as non-informed outsider to not make it worse by judging them.

Not disagreeing with you either Drum Roller. That went off at tangent to save myself further posting. To some people, emotional intimacy is not required for sex; for others, it is. One of the arguments in favour of professionally-run brothels is the protection they can offer employees. I didn't suggest emotional intimacy though David, I was thinking of physical intimacy. Often with unshaven, malodourous drunks.

I agree well-organised brothels sound a better alternative but even they offer limited protection, a worker must be in a position to signal her distress before her protectors can get involved. Presumably there will always be a delay. I do not believe what you have described constitutes consent. I know people who entered the sex industry by choice.

I know one who left by choice got a job managing a major retail chain and then left to go back to work in the sex industry because the conditions were superior. I'm not going to argue this is the norm. But I am going to argue that the Swedish model doesn't work. Their own evaluation report said that street prostitution had halved but that people working in the field do not consider that there has been an increase in prostitution since the ban.

But the report also criticised the fact that information was now harder to come by and that they couldn't be certain on many of the facets. If the best thing about the laws the people working in the field can say is that prostitution has not increased. And the murder rate has not gone down. And that it is harder to get information so some guess work needs to be utalised. Then wouldn't it be better to legalise it, regulate it and hit up every person who steps a toe outside the rules as hard as you can?

Wouldn't it be better to say, you must have a registered premises, so you know where the activities are occurring. You must be registered. Or you must have certain security? When none of the countries which have implemented the rules can show a decrease in prostitution, but all of them can show a decrease in available information doesn't that make you question the model?

I find it somewhat disturbing that someone found working conditions better in the sex industry than in major retail chains. I am not surprised, though. The only real choice we all have is which employer will abuse us. Sex workers are not alone in that experience, though their particular form of abuse does appear to be objectively worse than many others. This equally applies to everyone. The gender any particular person happens to be is largely irrelevant.

I do believe that the basic problem revealed by this article is the entitlement that some people feel to do whatever the hell they want to other people. My friend commonly argues that she had similar abuses and was held up while working in retail. She couldn't dictate her own hours and the pay was a pittance when compared to her sex work. Her boss was unreasonable and would commonly abuse her and she was propositioned by the area group managed. If that was going to be the case then why not get paid more, set your own hours and do it your way?

It's out of sight, out of mind as far as advocates of the Swedish model go. If prostitutes are forced underground to meet up with at risk clients and are made more vulnerable to assault and worse the advocates will tut-tut but consider their work is done. I find this nauseating. It is all about the advocates parading their morality with zero concern for the objects of their 'charity'. I try not to take an anti-religious stance but I saw this approach mirrored in Monday night's Q and A.

The worthy religios did not want Australia to participate in any more wars. Not a moment's thought as to the potential genocide of the Yazidis and other minority sects, it's all about our moral class keeping their hands clean. Totally useless and impractical?

Doesn't matter, they just want to avoid responsibility for difficult decisions. Ah, religious figures, railing against the evils of prostitution since at least the iron age. Vanguards of the efforts to ensure that, as a profession and practice, it remains as awful and alienating as possible so that they'll never be without a scapegoat for society's ills.

Well, personally I'll take the word of the Scarlet Alliance above anyone else, when it comes to prostitution. They're one of the rare voices talking about prostitution who actually have any first-hand knowledge. I've talked to plenty of intelligent and proud sex workers in my life, and most of them enjoy their work Did you know, for example, that most customers of sex workers are individuals with disabilities being brought by their families?

I do, because I've talked to current workers who want to be there, rather than intentionally conflating them with victims of pedophilia seriously, you're including an account from a child rape victim in your argument against professional sex work?

On the bright side, the religious argument doesn't appear to have been refined any since medieval times. Done, the attitude by many of the churches that people should obey the will of god, or that sex work is wrong, sets oddly with the belief held by many who contribute here that the only thing that should be considered is personal responsibility.

How do some of these people reconcile these two contradictory beliefs. As many people have made clear, the job you end up with up is far from being just a personal choice. That situation can be generalized to just about anything in life. Perspectives on sexuality and sex work are the end results of many forces, some of which we may be totally unconscious of. You have just described many women who work in factories, in hospitality, who clean other people's houses to put food on their tables.

If you can see a difference then that's because men like jenson have convinced you there's something very wrong with recreational sex. Prostitution, if done properly, is far easier money-making than toilet-cleaning or trench-digging and better-paid than dish-washing or bottle-collecting too. I'd do it if I was pretty. She considered herself in the mid-range for prices, saw about one client per day, for hours.

I'd do it in a heartbeat too if I could. I could pay off my mortgage in a matter of months! Dear Big Ben In my youth I worked for some years as a barman, yardman etc in the hotel industry.

This was at the time of the topless and bottomless barmaid. These women usually only worked a shift of a few hours, and were paid multiples of the hourly rate of the other staff. Although a callow youth, I did wonder why some women were prepared to work completely naked in a room full of semi-drunken men, and how their clothed co-workers felt about it.

To my surprise, both groups were happy. Those with no clothes said that they enjoyed having to work only a handful of hours a week.

Some were students, some had young children, some just liked the free time. Those with clothes wished the others good luck, some saying they wished they had the courage or the physical attributes to follow their lead. But they did not see them as victims, nor doubt their ability to decide to work naked for more money. I am not saying that naked barmaiding is like prostitution, but I would hazard a guess that Dr Jensen does not like it and is happy it is now banned.

But those to whom I spoke seemed quite intelligent and hardworking, and the industry seemed well run. It was stopped because others, presumably not customers or participants, did not like it. I find Dr Jensen's article very strong on his views on sex and morality, and, other than a couple of anecdotes to support his argument, very weak on evidence. Are we as a society better off without naked barmaids?

But was it inherently evil to the point where it should have been outlawed?

... 8 Apr Internet dating sites, many of which are euphemisms for casual sex Brothels are legal in Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria the infinite amount of free pornography available on the internet.” For those considering a future in the brothel business, Whitley says the principles of good business. 25 May It's time to tell truth about women, men and casual sex. asking chicks to bang him betrays a rather severe lack of social calibration at best. However, a new study published in the journal Archives of Sexual Behavior drives is to fly to Salt Lake City and drive to the legal brothels of Western Nevada. XVIDEOS 'Melbourne escort backpage' Search, free. Settings▽. Casual sex contacts positions vacant New South Wales Best adult hook up site prostitute.

The independent escorts in Adelaide are some of the most beautiful escorts in Australia who will make your fantasies a reality and give you an experience to remember. Own an Adelaide brothel and want to increase your business? Adelaide brothels are fighting for clientele. Be seen first and as the best adult services Adelaide has to offer.

Whether you are a brothel in Adelaide, an Adelaide erotic massage parlour, or an Asian brothel in Adelaide, we can help.

Let us customize an advertising package that will suite your Adelaide brothel. Call now and get the best advertising for you and your establishment. Stephies erotic massage parlour is one of the most discrete brothels Adelaide has to offer. They are considered one of the best parlours of sensual massage Adelaide has served by gorgeous and sophisticated ladies.

Don't miss visiting this brothel in Adelaide while you're in town and if you're seeking other adult services in Adelaide Stephies erotic massage can satisfy your needs. Lourdes Hilton SA If you are seeking adult services Adelaide gives you Lourdes, an Adelaide erotic massage staple. Lourdes provides sensual massage and escort services that Adelaide CBD visitors love. Like many Adelaide brothels, Lourdes has sultry women who know how to please.

If you are searching for a brothel in Adelaide, make sure you visit Lourdes and let their ladies give you an experience you will remember for a lifetime. Just minutes from the CBD, if you seek the best Adelaide erotic massage, their head turning ladies will satisfy your special desires and let you experience the ultimate pleasure. Don't miss experiencing a sensual massage from Elite. Call and make an appointment today. Studio 23 Kilkenny SA If you want in house escort services and adult services, Adelaide's Studio 23 provides it all.

Like most Adelaide brothels they have local and international beauties who are ready to provide erotic sensual massage that Adelaide visitors enjoy. Of all the brothels Adelaide has, make sure you visit Studio 23 for a specialised sensual and erotic massage experience that you will have again and again. Let Studio 23 satisfy you today. Adelaide Brothels Adelaide is the capital city of South Australia and is the most accessible city in the world. Or a proctologist - because I don't want to buy new cutlery every time they visit.

But these personal hang-ups are my opinions. They don't affect my children's choices and my disapproval is only worth as much as they choose to give it. You make a lot of good points, Joel. If I may paraphrase your general line of argument: I actively discourage my kids from working in an office or JB-HiFi, joining the church, being a member of the Liberal Party and would definitely not be happy if any of them married Julie Bishop.

So all these things should be banned. But from a purely pragmatic standpoint you can see how the economy would quickly cease to function. Plumbing would quickly be banned, sure there is good money in it, and it is fine if someone else does it - but there are more than a few parents who would not be encouraging their children to do it thereby triggering one of your banning laws.

Its more like saying "I will prevent my kids from selling narcotics", or "I will enocurage my kids to do something that doesn't involve them debasing themselves or is not likely to cause them and others permanent injury just so someone can get their jollies". Put simply, if yopu had a choice between mucking out a stable, digging a ditch or having a drunk man stick his willy in you, and the drunk guy paid you more, which would you choose? How woudl you feel afterwards. What would your wife and kids say if they came to "work"?

If you have tio talk yourslef into thinking your family are unreasonable for thinking you are being debased, you are probably in the wrong. Joel's now reached a point where he's I think unintentionally now a sex work advocate - he just wants to ensure working conditions and hygiene standards are good for those in the trade. Dr Dig and Joel on the same page! The stigma around prostitution goes back to biological constraints and risks that can now be circumvented.

Take away the anachronistic cultural baggage accrued from the past and its not hard to see a lot of other jobs that are far more dangerous, demeaning and truly dehumanizing out there and the Jensen's of this world don't make a sound in complaint about them You don't like prostitution because you think it's dirty and debased. Stop thinking it is and it won't be. I wouldn't encourage my child to be a soldier, underground mine worker, or deep sea diver either - for obvious safety reasons.

Nor would I support my child's decision to be a sex worker - again for safety reason rational and for MY personal moral reason. Which is what Joel doesn't seem to grasp.

Joel's objection is based on his own moral and ethical view of the commodification of sex. Fair enough, and good for him for having that view. I share the view that sex is "special" and that there can be dangers associated with its sale. But I recognise that, like everything, those dangers can be mitigated against. Unfortunately, Joel and the author of the article goes too far in two respects: He attempts, somewhat foolishly, to use emotive arguments to support his belief.

Of course many people don't want their kids to be prostitutes, but once kids become adults, they make their own choices. He assumes that his own moral and ethical objections to something immediately makes that thing bad for society at large Gee, that worked well for alcohol, didn't it? Seem a lot of people these days conflate personal opinion with public good. It's why we have so many interest groups trying to influence public policy to achieve their own ends.

Just like a lot of people make vast leaps in logic, for example that just because money is involved, there can be no consent. Perhaps money provides the coercive means to obtain consent, but as others have pointed out, money tends to do that in far more industries and efforts that mere prostitution alone. Being beaten senseless and abused is no more a part of sex work as any other work.

If a prostitute experiences this they should be able to report the abuse to police and be taken seriously. This is one of the things that legalisation and regulation is meant to achieve. Many people do not have the same hang ups over sex that the rest of us do, I've known a number of women who talk quite openly about preferring highly paid sex work over working in an office. Obviously these particular women were not forced into the trade by unscrupulous people, which is another aspect of sex work that legalisation and regulation is intended to combat.

I suspect a lot of the negative feelings many voluntary sex workers express about their experience comes from the reaction they can expect from the rest of society. If we expressed the same acceptance of having sex as a profession as we do for fixing computers or constructing houses for a profession, well, I think a lot of that negativity would be eliminated.

There is abuse in all profession - either by employers or employees. Any abuse-free business transaction is fair game unless one takes the moral high ground such as those concerning the sex trade - including me.

On the other hand, I have absolutely no problem with a physically disabled person procuring such a service! But I'm a highly educated woman, with a good career and the potential to rise even higher. I choose not to engage in sex work, because I have other job opportunities that give me equivalent or greater income, that I prefer. Similarly, despite the fact that I could earn roughly the same amount I earn now in the mines, I have not chosen that occupation, because I don't like the conditions or requirements of that job.

As for enjoying sex, yes I do, far more than I enjoy working. But I also enjoy drinking and gambling far more than working. I'm not making a career out of those either. Firstly, not everyone "carefully select those who come to their bed", nor places significant emotional importance on the relationship between participants. Furthermore, you are making a great many assumptions about my sex life, and modesty.

You're really reaching here. We don't allow 16 year olds or people with significant intellectual impairments to serve behind bars, or to be bouncers, or miners, or a great many things. Furthermore, some women who work as submissive BDSM workers, or in boxing or MMA circuits do choose to be beaten senseless for a living. Many women are also exploited in the domestic help industry. Yet I don't see people rushing to ban the operation of domestic cleaners.

The problem with your loigic is that if it is extended, you refuse to ac. Nothwithstanding some assumptions I have made for convenience, you now differentiate as you intuitively know sex is different. I find it so odd that an educated allegedly progressive woman supports the degradation of her fellow women when the evidence worldwide shows unequivocally that the vast majority of women in the industry don't do it through informed consent or because they have choices - the industry you support from some perverse sense of freedom results in human trafficking, violence, infection and shattered people at a FAR FAR higher rate than any other profession you liken it to.

While some women MAY choose it though such a choice prob indicates a mixed up self image and other issues , the choices of a few does not justify the support for an industry that overall treats women as a facility. Tell me, if your daughter said at 7yrs old - "I wanna be a hooker" would you go "Thats awesome dear" like you would if she said "I wanna be a chef" or something similar?

If you would, don't have kids - or perhaps you'd take a cut and help them into their first job? Sounds repellant and offensive? It wouldn't be if it was, say, a hair salon. They're actually less likely to have a sexually transmitted infection than the people looking to pick up at the local pub.

I know you're asking your question to Jade, bit if a 7 year old relative of mine said she wants to be a prostitute If you had a seven-year-old daughter and they said "Daddy, I think I'm an atheist" how would you react? You'd want to explain to your daughter that you love her and cherish her, and that's why you want her to believe things that you think are true and important. But I imagine you don't want to ban atheism.

Similarly, I think most parents would be a tad put off by a child proudly announcing that they want to be the person behind the counter at McDonald's, even though that's considered a perfectly legitimate job. Part of that is just people wanting their kids to have certain kinds of aspirations.

I imagine parents would be a bit concerned at children wanting to be accountants, or financial planners, or something like that, too, just because it doesn't fit the standard mold of "what should my kid aspire to do? James - the comparison is not the same. If you think it is, it is a worry you'd accept sexual exploitation ion the same level as free thinking.

Joel, I think we are beginning to get at the crux of your concerns when you say "is a worry you'd accept sexual exploitation" The word "exploitation" being the key measure.

If you are actually concerned about people being exploited by organised crime syndicates, or by nefarious clientele then the solution is simple. The solution is legalisation and regulation and the implementation of appropriate occupational health and safety standards.

However, I suspect your real umbrage is not with "exploitation" but instead with "sex", and this no doubt is a result of your clearly sexually repressed life. The solution to that problem is simply for you to get deprogrammed from the indoctrination that has caused you to be sexually repressed. Kind regards and best of luck! Joel - 'exploitation' is bad.

Putting the two together as you have doesn't make the 'e' word worse. You're almost in the same camp as those you're responding to, but your hangups are getting in the way of your logic. James, if my daughter, by the time she turns seven, proclaims herself an atheist, I will be entirely delighted. It will stand as evidence that my efforts to brng her up to be a rational, critical individual are bearing fruit.

It's not my job to tell her what is "true and important" but to impart to her the cognitive and dispositional tools to decide that for herself. I'm an atheist myself; Joel's a regular commentator of a Christian bent. The comment was more directed at him. The point of the comparison is that thinking your child is making a mistake in wanting to do X or thinking X doesn't imply that you think X should be banned; there's no hypocrisy in wanting sex work to be legal but also wanting your child to not be a sex worker.

Describing sex work as 'sexual exploitation' is begging the question. I write code for a living, a skill I've honed through hours of practice and study. If I describe my work as 'intellectual exploitation', it's strictly accurate - my employer is using my intellect for their own gain - but maybe not probative, in that I'm paid rather well to have my intellect exploited.

You can't just assert that sex work is qualitatively different to other forms of work. You have to prove it. What's the qualitative difference? What's so special about sex, compared to raw physical labour, or raw intellectual labour, or other work that carries significant workplace safety implications? You have, of course, completely dodged the points about other jobs.

I would like to add that soldiers are paid to murder for a living; and, nobody is seriously suggesting that we end the exploitation of these poor men and a few women. That is due to the fact the industry is in need of being legalised and regulated so that appropriate protections associated with occupational health and safety can be implemented.

Joe - In your strange world, how can you even disagree with me? My choice is to be respected. My choice impacts on others. With sex work, a persons choice necessarily impacts on the sisterghodo worldwide. I'd protest DJs etc if the profession meant youth were enslaved and sold. I'd protest Rugby League if participants were coerced into it.

You have this utopian vison where if we just legalised and regulated it, the world would be a happy place, when evidence from Germany etc suggests this is not the case and 2 very secular countries have decided not to tolerate it anymore. Violence is not incidental to prostitution and neither is illness and neither is white slavery and neither is general misery - they are the rule not the exception for most of the world, and you want to accept that and think you're progressive?????

Joel, you're smuggling your conclusion into your premises. You have to actually demonstrate that sex work consists of being 'enslaved and sold', in a usefully relevant sense, you have to actually demonstrate that violence is 'not incidental' to sex work and that there's a qualitative difference between sex work and other jobs that have not-incidental violence in the same sense, such as several sports, bouncers, the military, etc. There's a rather significant world-wide trade in drugs.

It involves a lot of violence, causes a lot of illness, sometimes entails slavery or practices not much different. But if I drop by the local pharmacy to hand in a prescription for some codeine, I'm not really participating in the same sort of thing the warlords of Afghanistan's poppy fields are engaged in, despite the product being basically the same.

Thinking that sex work could be like a pharmacy, instead of like the international drug trade, is not a fundamentally ridiculous idea. We live in a developed country, we have a functioning police force, and they should be able to handle people being imported or coerced into sexual slavery. Domestic violence, drug abuse, and a number of other diseases are rife in mining and agriculture too. Should we ban people from engaging in those activities as well?

That will naturally solve the problem, right? And you are absolutely right. Even pure intellectual work is the same sort of prostitution as being a sex worker. The only difference is that you sell access to a different body part, namely your brain. Sex work is on the dangerous side and hard.

But it provides a service that there is an apparently never decreasing demand. In addition, it probably helps keeping sex-crime rates lower than they would be without prostitution. So it is an occupation which actually should command some respect rather than ethics tirades from some imaginary moral high-horse.

On the apropos of moral: So it's OK for a teenager to watch a woman's body in a pool of blood without her head on but it would completely ruin said teenager to see the same woman in a pool of water without her panties on. But for some reason, asking girls to pay me for the privilege of my intimacy just annoys them.

So in spite of my wishes to the contrary, I have to pursue it as a hobby and not a job. You have made some terrible assumptions about Jade, much to your own shame. As for your lame arguments. The reason the men and women involved in sex work are potentially subjected to violence from clients and people who exploit them for profit at times is not due to the work itself but simply due to the fact it is criminalised. Once it is legalised and regulated the men and women who undertake such work can be afforded the work place protections that are appropriate for their occupational health and safety.

It is people like you who continue to force sex workers into being criminals that causes them to be unable to obtain the appropriate occupational health and safety protections. If you actually cared about them you would support legalisation and regulation but we know you don't actually give a damn about them and instead just want to force your bronze age religious beliefs on others.

Now who is making assumptions? The whoel articvle is about the Swedish model, an dif you did any thinking you'd see that supporting sexual exploitation isn't a good idea.

Nordic model has less problems than outright prohibition, but it still has some very similar issues. Say you were working in an industry, and you knew that if you went to the police there was a chance of you losing your job. Not going to jail or being charged, just losing your job. Say, also, that you really need this job - you don't have many other options, and you don't have significant savings.

You'd think twice before going to the police with complaints in that situation, I think. Something similar goes on in the Nordic model.

Sure, a sex worker going to the police won't be arrested. But they might pay close attention to the people she interacts with on a regular basis - they're criminals, after all - and if it got out that that sex worker had talked to the police, their clientele is going to dry up - because people don't tend to like being arrested.

The end result is the same - less money for the sex worker. And if they're a sex worker because they need that money and that was the best option they can think of, they've taken a significant hit because they went to the police. This is a good point about potential of people not going to the police.

But in fact the opposite has been shown to happen. Evidence from Norway has shown that women in prostitution are much more likely to present to police and have reported harassment against them. The introduction of Nordic Model laws saw a decrease of reports of violent crime and sexual assault, but an increase in women in prostitution reporting verbal harassment, being spat on and other forms of physical and verbal harassment. This shows that the system works and women feel like they will be taken seriously if they are harassed by punters.

Interestingly evidence from NSW and NZ has shown that many people in the sex industry do not feel safe to present to police. The onus falls on women in the open slather sex trade jurisdictions to prove they have been wronged. As for those in Nordic model countries, the buyers are already doing something against the law and crimes against women in prostitution are taking seriously with no onus on needing to make distinctions as to what was agreed upon in the transaction of sex i.

Joel, I'm a software engineer. I make a pretty good amount of money. Instead of becoming a software engineer, I could have invested that time in becoming a lawyer, say. I have the intellectual chops to handle it, and I'd likely make more money now if I'd done that then.

So I guess choosing to be a software engineer makes me not very bright. If you haven't figured it out yet, personal preferences are a thing, and they do matter, rather a lot.

By your logic James - any choice is valid so long as it is legal or even if it isn't, but falls within some "acceptable" limits sex work is illegal in many places. Also, paying to hunt large game is my preference so that's cool - paying to hurt someone so long as they consent is fine not at all weird and viewing kiddie porn so long as the kid said they were OK with that is fine as well.

I mean, if they want to be hooker and you're OK with that, it's just work experience, isn't it? You should have been a lawyer with your moral outlook - you'd be in hot demand from the criminal underworld who are all innocent according to them as its all about personal preferencer, isn't it!

That wasn't my logic at all. I was explaining why somebody might not want to be a sex worker even if they theoretically would earn more money doing that without it implying they think there's something qualitatively different about sex work. You were, after all, asking Jade why she doesn't take up sex work.

The point is that I don't want to be a lawyer, not even for a substantial raise, and it's not because I think being a lawyer is a fundamentally awful practice that should be forbidden in all civilized societies. My logic for why sex work should be legal is very simple: I don't see why not.

You might want to explain why it should be illegal. With actual arguments, not just declarations that it's terrible and vile and exploitation.

If you read into the Swedish model, there are very strong arguments as to why France and Sweden have adopted this, and its based on harm minimisation to the women. In nations where prositution has been legal and controlled fo decades, it has fuelled and import based economy where women are trafficked into thje nation to make money for their pimps in a legal brothel, and kept quiet through corruption and violence.

The murder rate is far and away higher for prostitutes everywhere. Regulation has NOT made them happier - perhaps cleaner - but that is all. All it has done has legitimised a man treating a woman like a facility and weakened respect fopr themj - like it has with you - where you think you are being nice to women by saying "I support your right to be disrespected.

Novperson has self respect who prostitutes themself sexually. It is not empowering - it is degrading no matter how clean and organised it is. Do just a little reading, and you'll see the "Scarlett Alliance" are the minority - the majority of women worldwide are exploited by this industry. To me, your argument is like "a coke dealer is OK 'cause the people who use it are free to choose and he doesn't force it on anyone and they aren't hurting anyone and if it was regulated it'd be cheaper and safer" while ignoring the terrible violence in Mexico and Columbia that sustains the supply.

You'd then say "but if it was legal that would go away" and ignore that the suppliers then devote their economy to satisfying the urges of the wealthy West.

Finally - you assume that free choice is a noble ideal and it's not - its only good in relation to higher aspirations - it is not an end in itself. The commercial sex lobby are being disingenuous in their claims that there is no difference between sex and sport or office work.

How many senior executives sell their bodies for sex? How many sports stars? I agree with the Bishop on this one and support his points about the "Swedish Model". It is time to place the locus of the issue on the buyers of sex. I also agree that prostitution is a throwback to the slave market. Look at the fate of women and children in contemporary war zones trafficked, abused and sold into prostitution. Look at the numbers of people in our society who are forced by economic circumstance into something that they might otherwise not have to do if given a real choice in life, one supported by a decent standard of housing, healthcare and education.

I didn't actually read the Jade defended prostitution. I did read that she rightly compared to coal miners. You Joel are the one clouding the exchange by introducing a sense of guilt or shame to the act of prostitution. A form of employment undertaken by all sexes since the dawn of time. As to your question about work for the dole, there would no doubt be those who would choose sex work as opposed to painting a fence. Not everyone thinks as you do. It seems to be assumed here in the comments that Jade is a female..

Jade might even be a Trans I read this comment in full - but I stopped really thinking about it when I read the elusion to "liking sex" and being a sex worker. That in itself displays such a chasmic break in reality, that I can't actually get my head around it. Especially within the context of the Article. Which, as Jade point's out is nice and "straylian" in the fact it doesn't mention males. I think many people here have a very rose tinted vision of sex work.

My own reaction to this article was similar to mush that is said in the relies here. I only differ from Avargo in criticising the author for limiting the article to prostitutes. It would take a book, not a short article, to explore all the situations where 'consent' is not consent and employment is slavery.

The article is a good start though. By taking a stark example it allows us to expand the issue to other areas. And wage slavery, particularly in dangerous or grossly under-paid work, are indeed proper extensions of this matter. Now we need to consider how we should act on all forms of exploitation and slavery, where we can act.

Well said Jade, as a woman I completely agree. I would add that nowhere in Jensen's piece does he mention who seeks out sex workers, and for what reasons.

Instead there is an assumption that men are the only ones - they aren't - and that they inherently exploit the poor down trodden woman - many of whom make the informed decision to enter the trade. This is far from the case. A family member of mine worked in an industry caring for the disabled as a part of her duties she was sometimes required to recruit the services of sex workers for her clients. These were fully adult males that had NEVER had a normal and healthy sexual relationship with a woman, this in addition to their disability had an enormous effect on their mental health.

My family member said she respected them even more than some of her fellow carers - who in some cases looked down their noses on the sex workers. This is just one example of certain group who seek out sex workers for one set of reasons. As Jade points out all work is coercive to a point.

Sex work should be the same as any other profession, heavily regulated to ensure worker safety. A child being exploited is NOT a sex worker, but a victim and to equate the this with adult sex workers is disingenuous. Both of these situations are wrong. However to say that all prostitution is exploitation is as irrational as saying the all work is exploitation.

But for my need to eat, feed my children and pay my mortgage I would not be a work. I am forced to work but I an not exploited. SimonP38, You have correctly identified that 'sex work' and 'exploitation' are very separate issues. Exploitation is combated by legalising and regulating the industry and ensuring appropriate regulations and occupational health and safety standards are met. The Swedes agree with Dr Jenson that prostitution can never be consensual, and under newly legislated laws, men who pay for prostitutes can be charged with rape.

Thanks for the response and support guys! I really appreciate it, and am a little overwhelmed by the positive response. Legalisation, regulation and all the state protections to the workers that result is what is required.

Not more criminalisation which only provides income to organised crime syndicates. You are way way off beat in likening the act of someone entering somebody elses body as akin to working in a coal mine. Behind that act is a whole history of sex that is embedded deeply in a women's psyche and has come from the days when we had no power in our lives.

But never mind the history of humanity, because the history of sex workers is enough evidence to prove that using a sex worker has severe moral implications for the purchaser. If you care to invest some time on research into studies done you will find that a very high percentage of sex workers including male ones were sexually or otherwise abused as children. Ans psychological evidence to prove that many are trapped in a permanent cycle of abuse when they work in a sex industry. So basically, when you purchase sex you are damaging that person more.

There are men and women who enjoy the lifestyle and do it for that reason and the money. But how will you know that they are mentally healthy and that you are not just perpetuating the damage wrought by the uncle or father who crept into their bed at night? The article has not stressed this enough, but i think that is the point of it. I understand you reference to enslavery of work, everybody could. But sex is different, it carries a whole baggage of history that sits on the shoulders of the person working in the industry.

Jade, if your argument is valid, should our legal system treat rape any more harshly than another assault with a similar amount of actual physical damage? You need to consider your question more thoroughly. Rape is not consent. It is a complete assault of a person, whether a cut or bruise is obvious or not.

A punch is an assault too. Tell me polony if offered the choice of a rape or a punch, and you had no choice but to choose one, which one would you choose? The thing is Jade, a coalminer does not have penetration and ejaculation into or over their body as part of their job requisite. Also, you make the rookie mistake of conflating prohibition with abolition. Prohibition is illegal prostitution, whereas the Nordic Model sees prostitution as the human rights violation that it is.

The pimps and johns are penalised under Nordic Model Law, not the prostituted person. Many spin this 'just decriminalsie it. It's like marijuana, of it is decriminalised it will stop crime' - well, women and we know it is mainly women who are bought in the legal and illegal sex-trade are not marijuana, we are not drugs, we are human beings Alcohol is not abused when one drinks it, marijuana is not harmed when one smokes it- we ARE harmed when we are used and abused by men, paid or not.

Nor does full legalisation or decriminalisation make it safer. Prosituted people do not come forward, stigma is still a problem because men who buy us for sex do the stigmatising. Slavery still exists but were the abolitionists wrong to take the stand they did?

Groups like the Scarlet Alliance offer ZERO exiting strategies for anyone who wants to leave prostitution, yet are treated like they care about 'sex workers'- if by sex workers they mean johns, pimps and procurers then that is certainly true.

There is also a meme going around showing two people saying that in a capitalist society no one has 'meaningful consent 'in any job- 'except for 'sex workers.

We must respect their agency'. It is hilariously and sadly spot refelctive of how a neoliberal society hides it's head in the sand when it comes to the reality of sex-trade. The thing is Jade and the scripted responders - full decriminalisation is proven to expand the trade in people who do not want to be in the industry, so why should legislation, which gives men open slather to compensate us for their sexual abuse of us, be given priority over those desperate to leave, and those forced and coerced in to prostitution?

But then, as Thatcher said, "there is no such thing as a society, only individuals. By the way, I'd like to abolish coal mining too, but that should not entail penalising the workers. If a woman who doesn't want to do sex work is sufficiently desperate that she would do sex work, but sex work is effectively abolished - not because it's illegal, something Nordic that means there are very few buyers etc. It's a shitty situation to be in, but removing the sex work option leaves them worse off.

Now they have to pick the next least objectionable option, whatever it is. What does being penetrated or ejaculated on have to do with qualitative differences? Plumbers probably get dirty in a variety of unpleasant ways. Are you comparing murder rates for coal miners with murder rates for sex workers? Murder rates for sex workers against average murder rates for the populace?

But here's the thing: I don't believe your numbers. You might want to actually quote a reliable source. Radfems do have something of a history of making grandiose claims they can't really back up.

Are your numbers for sex workers in a country where it's illegal? What kind of regulations? What happens to the effect if you control for poverty? For example, I'd find it plausible that the poorest people in society have a greatly elevated rate of mental illness including PTSD and are more likely to be murdered, and that sex workers disproportionately draw from the poorest people in society.

Because if it's the latter, abolishing sex work only makes the matter worse! And how many soldiers get PTSD? How much more likely are they to die than the average person? I'd add nursing into the list of professions that have to deal with unwanted bodily fluids and police into the list of professions that have a high risk of murder and PTSD.

I value and admire them all. Have you ever spent time working under ground in a coal mine or any mine? What about those in Asia and Africa who are forced into the diamond and other gem mining areas?

What about the guys who spent weeks trapped alive here in Tasmania I think. Give me free choice and I would be swinging from a Mango tree, only there aren't enough to go around. Though I would say that there's a fairly good case that we can't actually give free consent to work, especially if we're currently jobless as the government can suspend your payments for refusing a reasonable job but also more generally in the context of economics.

The problem is that pundits like Dr Jensen only have an issue with this when it comes to sex and sex work. Regardless, this is all part of a bigger discussion on consent and coercion "free", "informed", etc. You have said everything I would have said to the moralising author of the article. In a effort to support themselves those who work in the sex industry, male and female, should at least be offered the same protections as any other worker, not marginalised and made illegal.

Jade, I agree with the points you made. Thank you for putting these across so articulately. I am a well educated 50 year old woman, and I've worked in a variety of senior corporate roles in my career. I had a change of pace for 8 years when I was 30, however, and was a private sex worker. I approached this job as I approached every other job- with a high standard of professionalism. I was good at my work, and was paid well. I stayed in the sex industry for as long as it suited me, then left to return to a previous career.

I took full precautions to mitigate risks. I felt valued for the service I could bring to many people who, for whatever reasons, felt the need to have to buy sex. Interestingly, I believe that sex workers do more to keep couples together than counselling in situations where there is a lack of balance in sex drives of each partner.

As a client once said to me, his wife was free to chose not to have sex very often. However, that was not HIS choice, and he wanted equal freedom to chose to have sex more often. As he pointed out, if he had an affair, it was likely that someone would be hurt as emotions would become involved. Therefore, he chose to buy sex professionally. It was discreet, his needs were met, and no-one was hurt. Generally, my clients were courteous, reasonable and very clear that they were purchasing sexual services, often as their fantasies.

They paid me well, and many came to see me regularly. They also respected the boundaries I made. If I had those years again, would I make the same choice to work in the sex industry?

I enjoyed that time of my life and have no regrets. And yes, I was a fully consenting, informed party of the sexual encounters.

Jade you talk of clouded views of labour and moralistic views of sexuality. If we are to treat the sex industry and so called 'sex work' as a legitimate service industry then we need to challenge the stigma and discrimination created by punters. Specifically brothels need to have gender quotas, we need to ensure that it is about experience and not who the punter deems to most desirable. If you want oral sex it would be given by the person best placed to provide that service despite whether they are male, female, trans or whatever their body type, age or ethnicity.

Instead we need to make sure that they become legitimate employers with no discrimination of employees, all need to be on a wage with no differentiation between whether an individual services 7 clients while the other only services 2. As an individual I can not go to McDonalds and demand to be served by the skinny girl, nor can I go to the hospital and say I want my treating physician to be the size 6, mid 20's female doctor of Asian decent.

Until we can eliminate the gender biases of the sex industry and system of discrimination and racism inherent in it, we really can not argue that this is a legitimate service industry like any other.

Good luck getting the pro-industry groups to support measures forcing punters and brothel owners to adhere to labour laws and anti-discrimination legislation. If we could all just get over our moralizing of those in the sex industry then there would be no stigma attached to prostitutes or pornstars and they would be far less likely to need to resort to drugs and self-destruction.

There's a very similar argument in how free we are to be Christians. If the choice of religion were really free then how is it that nearly every religious person here is a Christian, nearly every person in the ME is a Muslim, and nearly every person in India is a Hindu? At what point do we acknowledge that if there is any truth about religion then it is the truth that religion is not a free choice.

How free are Muslims to be un-Muslim? How free is a child educated in a catholic school to not be Catholic. I'm not talking here about cultural or community freedom - the pressure to conform is inescapable - but the ability to free oneself in one's own mind from the lifelong indoctrination in religious doctrine. Some prostitutes, I'm sure, feel this way about their role in the world: They have been beaten into submission. Many, I'm sure, feel otherwise: Life is made harder for them by the view of sex prostletused by men like Jensen, whose entire worldview is obsessed with other people's sex lives.

Jensen cares not one jot for the plight of women, sex workers, or indeed any other group whose life choices might make them vulnerable to the ideas men like him perpetrate. He only cares about his strict, pious outlook on the world and how we should all be obliged to live by it.

You don't know what Jensen does or doesn't care jots about. I don't think it fair for you say you do. I think it is counter to the principal of charity in critical thinking. But if frank criticism is the order of the day; can I just say I knew you were going to make this comment before you made it. I thought the topic is broadly men's sense of entitlement to women's bodies; mitor will chime in early denying there's a problem.

I think entitlement to women's bodies is more a feature of marriage than it is of prostitution, which seems to me to be more of a mutual transaction: The problem with prostitution is similar to the problem with drugs - prohibition, criminalisation, misinformation, pious finger pointing, and the general feeling that fun is sinful.

Moreover, the notion that an all powerful creator of the known universe and beyond has nothing better to do than obsess over what people do with their respective down stairs equipment is patently absurd. His writings show views consistent with his position and experience. I do not think it unreasonable to form an opinion, based upon his writing, on his views.

Jensen claims to be concerned with victims. Jensen frames an argument from the perspective of eliminating harm to victims. I think the decent think to do, is to address his stated concerns. And then present compelling evidence that Jensen doesn't give a jot. Can I give examples of evidence that might reveal someone doesn't give a jot about victims of sexual violence: In high profile sexual assault allegations they reflexively side with the alleged perp and decide the complainants are lying.

Or take the example offered in the article of the victim who was unable to say no to unwanted sex. This is quite common. This happened to many of my teenage friends in date-rape scenarios. The law says one must not do this. One has to try hard to establish consent. I would imagine someone who did not give jot about victims would argue for a change in laws so that this form of sexual assault would no longer be illegal. This is not an article about date rape, it's an article about a religious man's idea of consent in the sex work industry.

You could argue that someone who has been trafficked and is working in condition of slavery is not giving their consent regardless of the financial transaction.

I would agree with you. But it is neither sex nor prostitution that causes such situations to arise so easily - it is the pious, finger-pointy laws that surround sex work and consequently drive it into the hands of criminals that causes this. Changes to these laws to make sex work legal, respectable and safe are doggedly resisted by men like Jensen.

He doesn't want sex work to be safe for women. He wants it to be violent, dangerous and unpleasant. Each time a prostitute is murdered or plied with drugs or trafficked by the criminal underworld it is an incidence of divine retribution. Jensen doesn't care about consent or women, he cares only about his holy book. Dr Jensen's comment about cannibalism was foolish and a straw man, because sexual consent generally does not allow killing or mutilation. Strangely, the usual suspects didn't pick up on that - rather, just went into his usual vitriolic rant and tried to change the topic.

Whatever Dr Jensen's views on the morality of sexual liaisons and whether people agree with him or not, he is correct in pointing out that there is a dark side - a very dark side - to the prostitution industry, and on an international level, it does indeed involve slavery.

I sometimes get the impression that if Dr Jensen wrote an article reaffirming his belief in the value of human life, Mitor would advocate the decriminalisation of murder just to denounce any ideas associated with religion.

However that simply means there is a case for proper regulation of the industry to clean that out. And what is the cause? Or is it the stupid laws that push the entire industry into the hands of criminals?

How can anyone freely consent in the sex industry when to do so means breaking stupid laws? Jensen was claiming that consent is illusory in the sex industry, but his conclusion was that this is the only possible outcome in an industry built on sin. I challenge that claim. Well said oh bold one.

The point about freedom to be a particular religion is a good one. Surprising how it is lost on the religious however who cling to their own religion of Islam, Christianity in it's great variety of different flavours , or other faith, secure in the belief that they were lucky enough, to be born into the one true faith.

Just a quick point - worth noting always that just like Christianity, Islam also comes in a wide variety of flavours. Please educate me Filipio. I thought there were only 2 varieties of Islam. At last count there were 40, different of Christian. Depending what you're counting there up to five branches of Islam. Sunni, Shia and Sufis being the most well known. Think of them as Catholics, Orthodox, Protestant etc.

It's not all that accurate but what the hell. Within each branch are further divisions, usually, but not always called schools.

Perhaps these can be likened to Lutherans, Anglicans, Methodists and so on. Each school, or equivalent is then divided into a myriad of movements, sects, organisations, bodies and branches that are different by their interpretation and weighting of scripture, but also different because we're talking different countries, different races, different languages and different cultures.

Islam is a different thing in Jakarta than it is in Mogadishu, for example. I'm notionally a Shafi'i Muslim, but you'll not mistake me for a Yemeni. Much like a fragmented Christianity, united and divided by a belief of the nature of Christ, so too a fragmented Islam is united and divided over most issues, because both were written by, made by and made for men. Christianity has a unifying Christ, Islam has a unifying shahada.

It seems the shahada is the creed that there is no god but God. That seems to be the jumping off point for deciding what that God requires. Would you include the Druze and the Alawites as Islamic?

The Yasidis seem to have been a little to liberal in their borrowings from other religions to come into that group. Curious to see the Shafi'i include some? I thought the Kurds were all closer to the Shia strand. It is belabouring the obvious to point out that all scriptures are written by men and that any claims for divine inspiration are untested.

Thanks for that Dove, you have enlightened me enormously. Just a little puzzled by your remark that you are - "notionally a Shafi'i Muslim" and then you go on to say that they were all made up by men. How do you maintain your faith given this? Thor, I am a Muslim and try to live a good life within certain parameters and guidelines. Whist there are particular values and perspectives that I hold because of this, this is not the same thing as believing in foundation myths or taking ancient texts as verbatim.

Most religious people do, but I don't belittle, mock or needlessly criticise their beliefs or their version of faith. I'm more interested in how people behave towards others and how their actions play out in real life. Religion isn't just the children's stories or the funny hats or wording of rituals. It's about how people choose to life in the here and now- and the life I try to lead is totally compliant with the life people try to lead in Evangelical, Orthodox or Mormon Christianity.

Truth be known it's the same life people try to lead in Buddhism, Hinduism and Wiccanism. The Qur'an is an astonishing piece of literature and worthy of scholarship and even veneration. But it was written by men, is of a specific time, has a context and shouldn't be taken literally. The exhortations and commandments of the ancients shouldn't be viewed as contemporary instructions.

And you you can have this debate in a mosque, but like most things, you need right context. Some tact might help! OK, taking your reply at face value as sincere. A key issue here concerns what is meant by 'variety'. If you are referring to relatively formal demoninations, then certainly there are vastly more Christian denominations than Islamic ones. And of course there are particular demoninations that might not be recognised by others or only partially as being Christian.

In this specific sense, there are certainly more than two varieties of Islam -- I imagine you are thinking of Sunni and Shia, but one can add Sufi with parallels to Gnostic forms of Christian mysticism which stands somewhat apart from the Sunni-Shia axis, and also Ahmadiyya and Khawarij.

Historically there were others, arguably no longer existing. Each of these denominational 'umbrellas' have scores of distinct branches and sects. So even at this level there is quite a bit of diversity in how people 'do' Islam.

But given a fairly clear doctrinal imperative to avoid overt divisions in what is again doctrinally envisaged as a single Islamic community, applying the notion of denomination is rather limited and misleading in relation to understanding 'variety' in Islam.

More important and accurate is paying attention to distinctive forms of collective practice of the religion by particular populations, who may well just refer to themselves as 'Muslims', or perhaps as Sunni. Remember in the absence of a centralised ecclesiastical order, such as exists in most major Christian churches, local forms of Islamic leadership have proliferated over centuries, some more localised, some more national. The influence of pre-existing indigenous cultures is profound.

So distinctive regional variants of Islamic practice -- of the sort that often attract description as a 'denomination' in Christianity -- abound. This pushes the idea of 'varieties' of Islam out to number in the many, many thousands. Thanks for that Filipio. I suppose that when a religion is introduced to a different culture some modifications are inevitable. Christianity has had a lot of this in places like South America - some quite bizarre.

I guess what sets Christianity apart is the way it splinters into different groups in the same cultural background. America, the USA , is the spawning ground of so many. Luckily that's not the case here. There may be a cultural thing, but that's not a legal thing. I do like the line 'nearly every religious person here is a Christian', as it ignores those who don't have a religion which according to my memory of the census is getting larger.

As for a child within a catholic school, i'll expect they are doing the motions of doing whatever the rest of the class is doing, but I seriously doubt the school is keeping a count of which ones go to mass on the weekend, or how often they go to confessions. Or how many believe in the real presence in communions.

So I'll say 'not a lot' Now can you be a non catholic in a catholic school? I do know a Christian who worked in a muslim school as a teacher, so MAYBE there is no requirement to actually be catholic to go to a catholic school.

He wrote it down? Perhaps part of what Mitor was pointing out is the fact that many people raised in a religious tradition have been truly brainwashed in the sense that any questioning of the faith was consistently meant with threats and rejection by family and community. For example I know a few people who were raised in Muslim countries who said they learned from a very early age to dare not question religion or face the worst possible consequences.

By which I don't necessarily mean death, but complete ostracism from family, friends and community. Obviously they did not freely choose their faith under such circumstances.

So Jensen should argue that religious indoctrination of children is child abuse and should be illegal. You were putting good arguments until the last paragraph, and then spoilt it all by nastiness. You do not know what Jensen cares about and it is not your place to judge another person's morals and motives. Best stick to the message of the article and give up attacking the message. Connie41, You suggest that Mitor doesn't "know what Jensen cares about and it is not your place to judge another person's morals and motives" Actually Jensen makes his position abundantly clear in this opinion piece and in his early opinion pieces.

After all he is the rector at St Mark's Anglican Church and the position of the Anglican Church in relation to controlling the sexual activities of human beings is well defined and publically available.

Just as Mr Jensen's opinions are clearly defined in his many opinions pieces for the Drum which can be viewed by clicking on his name above. What Mr Jensen clearly concerns himself with is not the welfare of sex workers or their clients but instead with the ability to proselytise and control the lives of other human beings with his religions doctrines and earn a living, as a Rector does, from the adherence to the said religion by other human beings via their tithes.

The greater danger to society and humans is not sex workers, their clients, or consensual sexual acts Throughout life, people have to make decisions; not all of which are wise.

Some are out of need, greed and necessity; while others happen on the spur of the moment. Selling one's own body is something that a woman has to live with, whether it be a one off time or a long time profession.

When I was at university in the early 's in Melbourne, I worked part time as a waitress to pay for accommodation and other living expenses. I was born and raised in the country, so city life was new to me. One night after working a Friday night, the restaurant I worked in was fire bombed and destroyed in a gangland war.

I had no job then and no income. One of my roommates was a prostitute and she got me a job at a well known brothel in Melbourne. I worked nights a week during my final year at university.

After leaving university, I got a job in the armed forces and quit my sex work. Twelve months later I was married and I am still happily married. I am not proud of the fact I sold my body as it was out of necessity. I believe it made me a more understanding and a better woman for the experience. I might add that I was never into drugs and still clean in that respect.

Drugs were rife even when I worked in the 's. Thank you for your story queenguinevere. I recently spoke with a woman who arrived in Australia as a refugee from Latin America, a single mother of three, and she chooses to work in the sex industry because that's the only way she can put food on the table for her family.

The real outrage in this situation is not that she does sex work, but that in one of the wealthiest countries in the world, in a time when the world has never been wealthier, people don't have more choices about the work that they do.

Casual encounters qld advocate adult services Sydney

Free casual encounter best brothels New South Wales

DOGGING LOCATIONS LOCAL HOOK UPS SYDNEY