Friday, January 13, 2012

This house would criminalise the purchase of sex - closing speeches

Third proposing speech
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Friday Debate Blog and thank you for reading this last proposing speech. In the latter, I will try to sum up the main clash points we had during this debate and to show you what we should learn from them.

The first and main clash point is whether the working conditions of a prostitute or the prostitution itself are the main issue we are arguing about. I will make it very clear: prostitution is not a work. Therefore we cannot speak about the working conditions of a prostitute. Hence, the real issue is the prostitution itself because what we aim at improving is the living conditions of a prostitute. This bill is not some kind of hidden way to prohibit prostitution: as said GQ in the second speech, we are abolitionist. And as said MD in the first speech, prostitution is not a fatality and our final goal is to end this so harmful practice. [...]

by MLF

Third opposing speech
Ladies and gentleman, with this debate nearing to the end i would like to sum up the ideas of my team and to show you all how realistic and logical they are, unlike the proposing team’s arguments. 

Indeed they are proposing the most wonderful but unrealizable project ever. You want to suppress prostitution ? Like suppressing the « droit de cuissage » but the « droit de cuissage » appeared and disappeared in a specific historical context and was the result of a certain culture. Whereas prostitution is the oldest job in the world, it exists in every country and has always been able to break all the rules whether they were religious ethical moral or legal. It’s a fact and we can’t deny it. We will always find frustrated men and women that need money quickly . Legalizing prostitution or suppressing it those are the two radical and opposing goals that formed the main clash point of this debate. I think that it appears quite clearly that suppressing the oldest habit in the world is utopian. So why spending money and energy in utopia ? […]

by MM


Third proposing speech
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Friday Debate Blog and thank you for reading this last proposing speech. In the latter, I will try to sum up the main clash points we had during this debate and to show you what we should learn from them.

The first and main clash point is whether the working conditions of a prostitute or the prostitution itself are the main issue we are arguing about. I will make it very clear: prostitution is not a work. Therefore we cannot speak about the working conditions of a prostitute. Hence, the real issue is the prostitution itself because what we aim at improving is the living conditions of a prostitute. This bill is not some kind of hidden way to prohibit prostitution: as said GQ in the second speech, we are abolitionist. And as said MD in the first speech, prostitution is not a fatality and our final goal is to end this so harmful practice.

Why use such strong words? Because as I said we want to improve the living conditions of a prostitute. And by prostitutes I mean those who are taken from their native countries, drugged, denied from such a fundamental human right as having an identity and finally slaved to a pimp and forced to take the street. That is nothing we can call a job and certainly not to compare with the working conditions in the industry. I’m also desperately looking for the consented part of this activity but I really can’t find it.
 We strongly believe that a real cultural change and an evolution of the mentalities are needed to achieve this goal. That’s why we use strong words, to impact mentalities.
Moreover, we think that this bill will mostly make it clear that the real victim here is the prostitute because that’s what people need to think. To achieve this goal, making the client a criminal is unavoidable but clearly worth it. I will add that 80% of French prostitutes are from Eastern Europe or Africa (not in all cases forced prostitute but still, much more exposed).

The second main clash point is on the way of fighting prostitution networks and pimps. We strongly believe that abolition will be much more efficient than legalisation on this fight.
Firstly because, as said in both the first and the second proposing speech, it will probably mean less clients, and less clients means less prostitutes and thus less forced prostitutes taken from Eastern Europe or Africa. Whereas a legalisation will probably cause the opposite and these networks could even become in the worst case scenario some kinds of lobbies. 

Besides we don’t think that with the legalisation of prostitution the prostitute would rather go to the police for protection. Prostitutes are afraid of the police because of the known violence of policemen against them. And while fighting the prostitution networks, the police will still see the prostitutes as a part of these (and so as criminals) and will hardly stop their violence even with the legalisation. And to fight the prostitution networks, we need to create a relation of trust between the prostitute and the police. For all these reasons, we believe that the criminalization of the purchase of sex is the best idea. It will be, as I said before, a first step in making mentalities evolve and hence improve the relation between the police and the prostitutes because they will no longer be seen as criminals but as victims. And then stop the violence of policemen against prostitutes.

To conclude, I think I have shown that the activities of the prostitution are far more morally wrong than the tricks and cons used by both genders in the consented game of seduction and that the only way to fight it and then to improve the living conditions of a prostitute is an abolition, as drastic as it seems.
I will end by saying that there is no incoherence claiming an abolition of prostitution to protect prostitutes because we know that there will still be prostitutes and as you smart readers understood, we over all aim at a cultural change and an evolution of mentalities.
So, thank you for reading and vote for us!

MLF

Third opposing speech

Ladies and gentleman, with this debate nearing to the end i would like to sum up the ideas of my team and to show you all how realistic and logical they are, unlike the proposing team’s arguments. 

Indeed they are proposing the most wonderful but unrealizable project ever. You want to suppress prostitution ? Like suppressing the « droit de cuissage » but the « droit de cuissage » appeared and disappeared in a specific historical context and was the result of a certain culture. Whereas prostitution is the oldest job in the world, it exists in every country and has always been able to break all the rules whether they were religious ethical moral or legal. It’s a fact and we can’t deny it. We will always find frustrated men and women that need money quickly . Legalizing prostitution or suppressing it those are the two radical and opposing goals that formed the main clash point of this debate. I think that it appears quite clearly that suppressing the oldest habit in the world is utopian. So why spending money and energy in utopia ?

There was another clash point , my friends made the distinction between two kinds of prostitution : voluntary prostitution and forced one. Our opponents have pointed out during the whole debate that the first group was a minority.I would like to stress that it’s a mistake. It’s not because you won’t see your family and friends practice prostitution that no one does it voluntary. Actually, there is a union in France for « sex workers » and has a significant number of members today. They have the right to choose this way of living since it is harmless. And GQ saying the opposite without arguments is not valid.It is harmless because the prostitute earns money for living and delivers a service to her client in return. I admit that it can shock some of us but can we delete a practice simply because it does not adhere to our values? For instance, for those who are disturbed by porn industry, sex shops strip clubs exist - it’s a matter of selling a body too – they simply live without facing ever. It’s a hidden world you enter only if you want to than why can’t we do the same thing for prostitution ?

Now i would like to come back to the motion and sum up all our ideas and show you why this motion should be defeated. 
The problem with prostitution is first of all the forced one.We find in their all the trafficking in women from poor to wealthy countries, abuse of  minors and all the developed and powerful networks that turn to hell the life of so many women through the world. Instead of criminalizing the purchase of sex we should put on some stronger measures to stop these acts that are reminiscent of slavery. It would be so much more efficient and will really decrease the number of prostitutes. This should be the first step the number one priority, i don’t understand why we are even talking about new bills before finding the solution to this problem !!!! 

The second problem is the one of diseases such as AIDS. The answer is simple and already applied : awareness of the concerned parts and methods of contraception free for critical cases.

We think that this is not the solution and we propose legalization of prostitution. We think that framing this act is better than prohibiting it. Making it illegal isolates the prostitutes and offer a fruitful market to the pimp. Without rules their women are slaves and not employees.

To conclude, i would like to say that we have here two visions one that is realistic and may not match your values and one that is utopian and would be perfect in some dream. Ladies and gentleman chose the way of reality and vote for us !!

MM

No comments:

Post a Comment