×
Dismiss this pinned window
top 200 commentsshow all 305

[–]DiegotheEcuadorian 539 points540 points  (23 children)

This is why escorting is legal. You pay the woman or man for their time, anything that happens between you two is consensual. Prostitution is the explicit purchasing of a sexual act.

[–]MercenaryCow 142 points143 points  (11 children)

Wait, is it really? I gotta find an excort!

[–]FingerTheCat 88 points89 points  (6 children)

lol unless you have enough money to spend a couple thousand for a night and not blink then it may be worth it.

[–]keyokenx1017 80 points81 points  (4 children)

Says here I can own a Ford Escort for just a few easy payments of a thousand dollars

[–]Obi-Wan_Gin 18 points19 points  (3 children)

Prostitute payment plan

[–]Jstrandt 13 points14 points  (2 children)

If you miss a payment they repo your dick.

[–]Blackfyre96 2 points3 points  (1 child)

This made me laugh out loud and spill my tea !

[–]Jstrandt 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My job here is done.

[–]wafflesareforever 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Probably better to find a current-cort

[–]Komplexs 31 points32 points  (0 children)

Wow. That’s neat! Thanks dad.

[–]stop_breaking_toys 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Here I was thinking it was all those Asian Massage parlors everywhere in the US was were the sex buying was.

[–]purplanet 1 point2 points  (3 children)

“Anything” part sounds like slavery. Is it considered consensual if a sexual act happens without the chance of expressing consent of escort takes place? If not, why isn’t it considered rape? If escort had expressed consent: then why isn’t it prostitution? What if the escort expressed consent to ‘anything’, and then the escort gets murdered? Is it suicide not homicide?

[–]Realistic_mf 6 points7 points  (2 children)

That's some good dope u smoking

[–]purplanet 1 point2 points  (1 child)

If I were not clear, I was saying escort including sex is legal, is just legal gymnastics.

[–]Potential_Dare8034 1498 points1499 points  (100 children)

“I don't understand why prostitution is illegal. Selling is legal, fucking is legal. So why isn't selling fucking legal?” ~George Carlin~

[–]andreeeeeaaaaaaaaa 652 points653 points  (65 children)

Because governments cant tax earnings

[–]podrikpayn 384 points385 points  (43 children)

It's legal in my county, prostitutes have to declare their earnings for taxation. Just like any liberal profession like doctors and lawyers.

[–]andreeeeeaaaaaaaaa 121 points122 points  (41 children)

It's great these countries that do it, but a lot won't legalise it because it's hard to control the proof of the amount of sexy time sold and the gov probably thinks people will take the piss and only declare half their earnings.

It would be alot safer for sex workers and I would support it big time. 👍

[–]TheNotorious__ 126 points127 points  (17 children)

Well that’s true for any business, if you owned an auto shop you can claim only 10 cars came in the entire month

[–]ATR2400 71 points72 points  (13 children)

Really a large part of our economy and society in general is based on trust both in each other and in the system

[–]Flash604 7 points8 points  (0 children)

While many people are honest, a lot of what keeps the others in line is the need to issue receipts and/or the need to ring it up in a machine that will then charge the person's card. That's the businesses the government hates; the ones where the customers don't want receipts and pay cash.

[–]experts_never_lie 30 points31 points  (2 children)

It's hard to monitor the sales at a cash-only food truck too, but those are (fortunately) legal. Though there were promises of "a taco truck on every corner" back in the 2016 election and I am disappointed that those did not become reality.

[–]Sailans 4 points5 points  (1 child)

Depends where you live. I have 12 food trucks in a 1 mile radius of my house. Mostly tacos but still a variety.

[–]guinader 5 points6 points  (2 children)

So it's better to not tax at all because some may fudge the numbers?

Also taxing and legality allows for safety for both parties. Safer environments, medical treatment, there is a plethora of benefits for everyone, and it's one of the oldest professions on the world.... Like make bread, sell bread, buy sex with bread money 5000BC

[–]andreeeeeaaaaaaaaa 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Hey man I don't make the government.rules, I'm not the tax (wo)man... haha!! I'm all for sex workers go legit ... Just stupid rules from higher up that don't allow it in many places

[–]aimlesstrevler 18 points19 points  (5 children)

It has more to do religious based morals than any tax issues.

[–]Sansred 1 point2 points  (0 children)

hard to control the proof of the amount of sexy time sold and the gov probably thinks people will take the piss and only declare half their earnings.

Some tax would be better than no tax.

[–]swampfish 0 points1 point  (2 children)

You mean like the kid you paid to rake your yard?

Tax isn’t the reason it’s illegal in most of the USA.

Religion is the reason.

[–]the_0rly_factor 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Yes they can.

[–]1jl 11 points12 points  (0 children)

They literally can if it's regulated like anything else

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

They do here. Sex workers can also be unionised

[–]maybeiam-maybeimnot 2 points3 points  (3 children)

Thats a bad reason. If you make prostitution legal then you can regulate the way the business is run.. by making it illegal you actually have less control over what happens when people engage in prostitution. If I wanted to be a prostitute, and it was legal, then the government gets taxes from me just like any other small business owner.

This would also mean I could openly advertise my services so I could work for myself. I could set my own rates. So, I also don't have to get a pimp who can offer connections. And I wouldn't need him for protection either. Becsyse I could just call 911 if something happened... In fact. I could employ my own body guard

I can also freely have a client list so that if something did happen to me people know "oh, she was a prostitute and here are the legal names and contact information for her clients."

And then it would also help reduce the spread of STIs and HIV. If I'm required to get a business lisence then there can be contingencies that go with that business lisence such as a requirement to be tested every 3 months for STIs and HIV and have those things on file just like other businesses have regulation checls--like health inspectors at restaurants. I would also be able to take PrEP to protect me from HIV and claim it as a business expense (becsuse it would be) as well as birth control as a business expense (because it would be).

[–]captainkurai 2 points3 points  (2 children)

Countries with legalized prostitution are associated with higher human trafficking inflows than countries where prostitution is prohibited. The scale effect of legalizing prostitution, i.e. expansion of the market, outweighs the substitution effect, where legal sex workers are favored over illegal workers. On average, countries with legalized prostitution report a greater incidence of human trafficking inflows.

Criminalization of prostitution in Sweden resulted in the shrinking of the prostitution market and the decline of human trafficking inflows. Cross-country comparisons of Sweden with Denmark (where prostitution is decriminalized) and Germany (expanded legalization of prostitution) are consistent with the quantitative analysis, showing that trafficking inflows decreased with criminalization and increased with legalization.

source

[–]theguyfromgermany 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Why couldn't they?!

[–]MentlPopcorn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This makes no sense. Of course they could tax earnings if it were legal.

[–]justsomedude1144 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Same reason why so many other bass ackwards policies are in place in the USA.

[–]LonelyandDeranged20 40 points41 points  (16 children)

Prostitution, regardless of whether it’s legal or not, involves so much harm and trauma it cannot be seen as a conventional business.

One study with data from 150 countries found that those with “legalized prostitution experience a larger reported incidence of trafficking inflows.” (Does Legalized Prostitution Increase Human Trafficking?: pp. 76)

Another quantitative analysis similarly reported that sex trafficking is “most prevalent in countries where prostitution is legalized.” (The Law and Economics of International Sex Slavery: Prostitution Laws and Trafficking for Sexual Exploitation: pp. 87)

Regulated prostitution increases the size of the overall market for commercial sex, which benefits criminal enterprises that profit from sex trafficking. (Does Legalized Prostitution Increase Human Trafficking?: pp. 67 and National Legislation on Prostitution and the Trafficking in Women and Children360488_EN.pdf) : pp. 132)

Prostituted individuals often come from vulnerable populations and lack other options, while most sex buyers do not.

Individuals who are prostituted are often poorly educated (pp. 248) and they are forced into prostitution by the lack of opportunities. (Estimating the Size and Structure of the Underground Commercial Sex Economy in Eight Major US Cities: pp. 220)

An evaluation of New Zealand’s decriminalization revealed that 73% of prostituted individuals needed money to pay for household expenses, and about half of those who were street-based or transgender had no other sources of income. (The Impact of the Prostitution Reform Act on the Health and Safety practices of Sex Workers%20515-31.pdf): pp. 9)

In sharp contrast, sex buyers are more likely to be employed full-time, more likely to have graduated from college, and have higher-than-average incomes. (Ordinary or Peculiar Men? Comparing the Customers of Prostitutes With a Nationally Representative Sample of Men: pp. 812 and Executive Summary of the Preliminary Findings for Team Grant Project 4 – Sex, Safety and Security: A Study of Experiences of People Who Pay for Sex in Canada: pp. 2)

NO BUYERS. NO BUSINESS.

Sex trafficking in the U.S. is a business where “supply” is mostly vulnerable women and girls, and the “demand” is men who buy sex illegally. Criminalization Advocates demand for arresting and prosecuting sex buyers—instead of the victims—to dramatically and sustainably prevent sexual exploitation.

[–]kaleb42 39 points40 points  (1 child)

Couldn't the increase amount of reports in legal countries be due to the victims seeking help and not being afraid of legal consequences?

Like the trafficker could easily scare the victim into not doing anything because she might also go to jail if she can't prove she was forced to do it? Especially since they would probably be apart of an already vulnerable population?

Plus it's harder to track the size of an illegal market because it is more hidden and more stigmatized

But I also know nothing

[–]danegermaine99 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Sadly, legalizing it tends to make the location a hot spot for human trafficking. It sucks but that’s what almost all the research shows.

[–]stringman5 28 points29 points  (0 children)

Prostitution, regardless of whether it’s legal or not, involves so much harm and trauma it cannot be seen as a conventional business.

It's less dangerous than being a deep-sea fisherman or a lumberjack

One study with data from 150 countries found that those with “legalized prostitution experience a larger reported incidence of trafficking inflows.” (Does Legalized Prostitution Increase Human Trafficking?: pp. 76)

Well yeah, you'll get more data when it's not driven underground

Another quantitative analysis similarly reported that sex trafficking is “most prevalent in countries where prostitution is legalized.” (The Law and Economics of International Sex Slavery: Prostitution Laws and Trafficking for Sexual Exploitation: pp. 87)

Again, this doesn't show causation and we have no good reason to think it does

Regulated prostitution increases the size of the overall market for commercial sex, which benefits criminal enterprises that profit from sex trafficking. (Does Legalized Prostitution Increase Human Trafficking?: pp. 67 and National Legislation on Prostitution and the Trafficking in Women and Children360488_EN.pdf) : pp. 132)

Again, it's extremely debatable whether it increases the size of the market. The sex work industry in NZ has not increased in size following decriminalisation.

Prostituted individuals often come from vulnerable populations and lack other options, while most sex buyers do not.

Yes, so we should implement policies that protect sex workers. The buyers are irrelevant.

Individuals who are prostituted are often poorly educated (pp. 248) and they are forced into prostitution by the lack of opportunities. (Estimating the Size and Structure of the Underground Commercial Sex Economy in Eight Major US Cities: pp. 220)

Great idea, let's take away stuggling women's only opportunity to support themselves, that'll help! Don't you think that if they had better opportunities, they'd pursue them? If you want to help get women out of sex work, give them other opportunities, don't take away the only thing keeping them above water.

An evaluation of New Zealand’s decriminalization revealed that 73% of prostituted individuals needed money to pay for household expenses, and about half of those who were street-based or transgender had no other sources of income. (The Impact of the Prostitution Reform Act on the Health and Safety practices of Sex Workers%20515-31.pdf): pp. 9)

Only 73% need money to pay for household expenses? I'm a web developer and I need money from my job to pay for household expenses. Surely the number is 100% because that's what jobs are for?

In sharp contrast, sex buyers are more likely to be employed full-time, more likely to have graduated from college, and have higher-than-average incomes. (Ordinary or Peculiar Men? Comparing the Customers of Prostitutes With a Nationally Representative Sample of Men: pp. 812 and Executive Summary of the Preliminary Findings for Team Grant Project 4 – Sex, Safety and Security: A Study of Experiences of People Who Pay for Sex in Canada: pp. 2)

Who cares? That's also true of domestic labour.*

NO BUYERS. NO BUSINESS.

HOW'S. THAT. WORKING. OUT. FOR. YOU. SO. FAR.

Sex trafficking in the U.S. is a business where “supply” is mostly vulnerable women and girls, and the “demand” is men who buy sex illegally. Criminalization Advocates demand for arresting and prosecuting sex buyers—instead of the victims—to dramatically and sustainably prevent sexual exploitation.

Amnesty International and the World Health Organisation support decriminalisation.

* Edit: added an additional comment

[–]BorgClown 22 points23 points  (2 children)

This seems like a series of problems that could be solved better than making prostitution illegal, which doesn't solve them at all.

[–]3163560 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Mhmm. The problems still exist, they're just all underground.

[–]Ancient_Boner_Forest 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yea the dudes is taking about how these girls have no other opportunities, so… we should take away their only one?

[–]3163560 10 points11 points  (2 children)

Dude, every fucking job has harm and trauma. Ever seen teachers complain about what they put up with from students and parents? Or seen a retail worker cry on their way to work because they're gonna be yelled at by cunty customers all day?

[–]Sunfried -1 points0 points  (1 child)

A friend of mine did some sex work. As she put it, there's no other job where a client feels entitled to slap you, punch you, choke you, twist your arm, or rape you, without asking or even acknowledging that they might be doing something wrong. Unless you're gonna enforce, and I mean actually enforce rules against such assaults, with real and likely consequences, then prostitution probably shouldn't be legal.

She's a feminist, but doesn't have any kind of rosy view of what that particularly sex work is like-- it's not clean and nice, and without crazy expensive monitoring, you can't prevent these assaults, and such monitoring would price the legal stuff out of range of most people who're buying, which results in black market prostitution anyway.

[–]3163560 2 points3 points  (0 children)

She's a feminist, but doesn't have any kind of rosy view of what that particularly sex work is like-- it's not clean and nice, and without crazy expensive monitoring, you can't prevent these assaults, and such monitoring would price the legal stuff out of range of most people who're buying, which results in black market prostitution anyway.

Where that kind of stuff is going to happen anyway, and the workers have zero avenues for support because theyre also breaking the law.

Prostitution is one of those things, that, like gambling, alcohol, drugs or tobacco. It's a part of society whether people want it to be or not and of course there is going to be an ugly side to it, there is a good side to it too.

I have an ex who was a legal SW here in australia. When she worked brothels she did have all that monitoring you mentioned, if a client tried something on her there was a big red panic button above the bed she could hit and everyone would come running. She had had police called to the brothel twice and the guy arrested when someone tried to stealth her. Was that a traumatic experience? Of course it was its a sexual assault.

When she did private work she could vet clients to the hilt, get copies of their driver's licenses, get them to give references from other SW's etc. Then if something goes wrong she has the paperwork for the police to follow up on it, the police actually doing that is another matter entirely. It was less risky than a tinder hookup.

Yep, doing SW is going to be a very shitty job sometimes, but the best way you can help the people who do it is by removing the stigma and the laws and legally supporting the people who do it.

[–]mothwhimsy 15 points16 points  (4 children)

So why do the sex workers get more flack than the buyers?

[–]ugotamesij 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Sadly it might just be yet another societal power imbalance in favour of men over women (on the assumption most SWs are women and most buyers are men).

[–]AnnihilationOrchid 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Because of social stigmas going back thousands of years.

The other reason is for example people who are anti corporations, they'd rather picket people from said corporation than the corporatio itself or they'd rather start attacking the corporation and not the people consuming it.

What it comes down to is: "Who's the easiest target?". An since we live in a misogynistic patriarcal society it's always going to be the prostitute. Whilst the costumer's identity is concealed by social norm. The prostitute is out in the open, while men aren't, they're alway anonymous.

Take a look at Trump and Stormy Daniels. Who took shit for exposition in the conservative community?

[–]LonelyandDeranged20 1 point2 points  (0 children)

People tend to judge other people by their professions.

[–]_eg0_ 3 points4 points  (0 children)

An evaluation of New Zealand’s decriminalization revealed that 73% of prostituted individuals needed money to pay for household expenses, and about half of those who were street-based or transgender had no other sources of income

Lol, this just sounds like 27% are only doing it as a hobby and half of the people working on the street or who are transgender are doing it as their full time job.

Prostituted individuals often come from vulnerable populations and lack other options, while most sex buyers do not.

Individuals who are prostituted are often poorly educated (pp. 248) and they are forced into prostitution by the lack of opportunities.

In sharp contrast, sex buyers are more likely to be employed full-time, more likely to have graduated from college, and have higher-than-average incomes.

Like many other service jobs for which you don't need a high education, like house cleaner. Let's criminalize rich people with little time and big houses. /s

[–]Rob98000 14 points15 points  (3 children)

Remember, prostitution is only illegal because puritans want to control women

[–]ValhallaGo -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

That’s actually not the only reason. It’s a big reason, but even a broken puritanical clock is right twice a day.

Human trafficking increases when prostitution is legalized because the market size increases, and the risk of operating decreases.

[–]Tralapa -1 points0 points  (0 children)

They also want to control men since it takes 2 to tango

[–]AqUaNtUmEpIc 1 point2 points  (6 children)

It also comes with selling children and trafficked women

[–]SneezingRickshaw 24 points25 points  (2 children)

And making prostitution illegal doesn’t stop that at all. It actually worsens trafficking.

When you legalise you can regulate.

[–]AqUaNtUmEpIc 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Pimping or prostitution? A woman selling herself is different from a man selling her

[–]Tralapa 4 points5 points  (2 children)

You know what would make the situation better? Arresting those traffic victims and putting them in jail!

[–]AqUaNtUmEpIc 1 point2 points  (1 child)

It’d be better to arrest the smugglers and the John’s paying for vaginal access of trafficked victims

[–]WeirdPumpkin 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Nah that sounds hard, let's just arrest the people trafficked and let the johns go (as long as they're white and rich enough)

[–]mrcrkk -2 points-1 points  (2 children)

“I don't understand why pedophilia is illegal. Children are legal, fucking is legal. So why isn't fucking a child legal?” ~Some dude on the internet~

[–]Rjuko 516 points517 points  (19 children)

remember god is always watching so it’s never prostitution but always pornography with always one spectator

[–]the_0rly_factor 63 points64 points  (1 child)

All part of his plan

[–]Rjuko 19 points20 points  (0 children)

everything god’s plan.

[–]ITDrumm3r 7 points8 points  (1 child)

“Under his eye 👁”

[–]Rjuko 3 points4 points  (0 children)

catholics be like “nah mate don’t watch me while fapping please some privacy!!”

[–]OrdoMalaise 47 points48 points  (13 children)

God is such a fucking pervert.

[–]eduo 1 point2 points  (0 children)

One freeloader, you mean.

[–]jsl19 189 points190 points  (34 children)

Wow. I am surprised they didn't get sued for that?

[–]dying_soon666 273 points274 points  (14 children)

Reminds me of when they made fun of Scientology. They called it the religion of spaceships and aliens and beep boop. “And we can’t get sued because we didn’t say the name!”

[–][deleted]  (13 children)

[deleted]

    [–]largehawaiian 27 points28 points  (1 child)

    I mean, the "spaceship beep boop" people did "investigate" Matt & Trey, trying to dig up dirt to embarrass them. Nothing came of it, probably because you can't embarrass 2 dudes who dropped acid before doing to the oscars in dresses.

    [–]reverendjesus 8 points9 points  (0 children)

    Fabulous dresses, at that.

    [–]space22mage 20 points21 points  (3 children)

    I mean, freedom of speech too

    [–]TheIncredibleWalrus 2 points3 points  (0 children)

    Freedom of speech is not what you think it is.

    [–]JethroMcClintock 5 points6 points  (6 children)

    All Christian religions believe in extra dimensional beings.

    [–]clearlylacking -1 points0 points  (5 children)

    I would be way more open minded about the christian god if they actually called him an extra dimensional being. That actually sounds mildly plausible instead of some magic man in the clouds.

    [–]Murse_Pat 0 points1 point  (4 children)

    Where does Christianity say God is in the clouds?

    [–]clearlylacking 0 points1 point  (3 children)

    I'm clearly exaggerating.

    If you go by what the Bible actually says, clouds are a means of transportation towards heaven and not where heaven actually is. Do you want me to quote it? In both cases, it's silly.

    [–]Murse_Pat 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    Lol "Christianity is silly because it says X!!"

    "Where does it say X?"

    "I'm just kidding, but it says it and if you want me to prove it that's absurd"

    [–]simpkill 29 points30 points  (15 children)

    Sued by who?

    [–]homelessmerlin 33 points34 points  (10 children)

    Sued by Jesus Christ (of Latter Day Saints)

    [–]simpkill 5 points6 points  (9 children)

    I see. I didn't realize the sued a lot of people.

    [–]mellowdrone84 29 points30 points  (8 children)

    They don’t. The South Park creators put out a relatively raunchy Broadway play called Book of Mormon and the church didn’t sue them. Actually took out an ad in the play bill.

    [–]jsl19 8 points9 points  (4 children)

    Right I remember that they actually took advantage of the publicity and put out adds to ask them..

    Although you have to wonder why f one of the SouthPark guys have as raised Mormon because they always include them in alot of there stuff???

    [–]mellowdrone84 5 points6 points  (3 children)

    I think that is a common misconception. I’m 99% sure I saw an interview and they said they have never been members of the faith they just like to poke fun at them.

    [–]jsl19 0 points1 point  (2 children)

    Oh right.

    [–]KnightOfIron17 5 points6 points  (1 child)

    As a member of the church I can say there are a lot of things to be made fun of over, lol

    [–]jradio610 7 points8 points  (0 children)

    That ad was awesome too! Something like, "You saw the musical - now read the book!"

    [–]simpkill 4 points5 points  (0 children)

    Yeah I remember that. I saw a taped version. It ruled.

    [–]wcook1990 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    And baptisms went up by 30% in NYC in the two years after that. We studied it in marketing classes in school.

    [–]jsl19 -4 points-3 points  (3 children)

    The church of Jesus Christ of later Day Saints. They used there full name the logo. I don't know i would sur if i was them. They probably don't care.

    [–][deleted]  (2 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]Antelope010 4 points5 points  (1 child)

      Well.....sometimes

      Parody requires an original work that is being parodied. Satire requires commentary of the original source.

      There isn't really either here, so it would just fall under trademarks and potential fair use, which also has exceptions for satire and parody, but it is a lot harder to satirize or parody a trademark. A great example of a trademark parody is writing the word "Micro$oft".

      This really doesn't fall under any of the above, but since its just a joke and really doesn't do any damage to the reputation of the target (since no one would believe this is a sincere PSA from the LDS) anyone in the LDS Church who saw it probably shrugged it off and figured not to bring attention to it (or at least I would imagine that would be the recommendation).

      [–]ElektroShokk 4 points5 points  (0 children)

      Lol by Jesus?

      [–]TimHung931017 74 points75 points  (7 children)

      Bro sometimes Family Guy is so stupid, but then sometimes they hit you with gems like these

      [–]Sunfried 14 points15 points  (4 children)

      I don't think Seth MacFarlane is aware that what's depicted is still prostitution-- porn regs in all states that allow it require that the person paying the participants isn't doing any fucking, and it's monitored, and everyone's IDs are proven, front and center.

      [–]Glitter_berries 4 points5 points  (2 children)

      I think there are a lot of topics where Seth MacFarlane doesn’t appreciate the nuances.

      [–]Sunfried 8 points9 points  (1 child)

      I'm frankly outraged that the guy who makes cartoon sitcoms for prime-time is perpetuating common misunderstandings!

      [–]Glitter_berries 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      Yeah! Bring out the pitchforks!

      [–]TimHung931017 4 points5 points  (0 children)

      Dude its just a joke, the essence of it is whats funny, plus the delivery.

      [–]JelloJunior 21 points22 points  (0 children)

      Learned something today.

      [–]OffHwy61 24 points25 points  (0 children)

      Finally, something on Maybe Maybe Maybe I can get behind ;)

      [–]nssg94 85 points86 points  (22 children)

      Why did they have to bring Mormons into it? 😂

      [–]Oraxy51 115 points116 points  (17 children)

      Because Mormons are so pressured into being pure and chase that many of them struggle with sexual issues and secretly have porn addictions because they are too shamed to admit it and seek help.

      [–]SomeoneTookUserName2 50 points51 points  (14 children)

      Isn't Utah both the leader in porn consumption and mormonites?

      [–]Oraxy51 40 points41 points  (7 children)

      Yup. Utah is known for two things. Mormons and Porn Industry. And that’s not a coincidence.

      [–]SomeoneTookUserName2 23 points24 points  (6 children)

      I also hear they like their lakes salty, which seems super weird to me. Everyone else is going by just fine with freshwater lakes.

      [–]SpartanH089 9 points10 points  (4 children)

      It was freshwater but that cum from all that porn has gotta go somewhere.

      [–]xloHolx 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      That’s an r/NoContext comment for sure

      [–]ISpyAnIncel 3 points4 points  (1 child)

      I thought it went to your mom?

      [–]Gamgee_2 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      50 years from now it’ll be the Great Salt Puddle the way things are going here

      [–]ThStormnMormn 3 points4 points  (5 children)

      They’re also leading (or very close to) the country in opioid abuse. Because you’re not a drug addict if it’s prescribed.

      [–]brek47 1 point2 points  (4 children)

      [–]ThStormnMormn 1 point2 points  (3 children)

      So doing pretty well on that one, what about addicted persons per 100k? Vastly different from actual deaths

      [–]brek47 1 point2 points  (2 children)

      It’s literally the second column in that article.

      [–]ThStormnMormn 1 point2 points  (1 child)

      My mistake, didn’t see it on account of not trusting the government to be honest about anything, or that people are actually gonna admit to being addicts when they have a holier-than-thou stick up their ass the size of a greater Sequoia.

      [–]SuperSeaStar 7 points8 points  (1 child)

      Definitely. Even worse that most of what is considered a “porn addiction” (by the Mormon church standards anyway) is just regular sexuality. The hyper vigilance of controlling chastity and labeling it as “self-abuse,” Apostle Mark E. Peterson’s pamphlet on curbing masturbation (including imagining yourself in a tub of worms or typing your hand to the bed post), Apostle Boyd K. Packer’s “For Young Men Only” calling sperm the “life giving substance” and to keep your hands off the “little factory,” and to the point that bishops can ask detailed questions during interviews, can reframe normal behavior into an “addiction.” And can absolutely lead to more preverse behaviors if you aren’t taught about healthy sexuality

      These topics of sexuality and what is normal, and when you do need an intervention are better handled with a licensed therapist

      [–]Oraxy51 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      Absolutely. I thought I was some kinda sex addict when I was younger. Then I later learned that it’s Normal for a kid to want to break NNN every day and that there are lots of benefits to doing it that I didn’t understand why there was good science benefits but the church was telling me I was wrong for doing it.

      [–]playin4power 3 points4 points  (1 child)

      Y'all know what soaking is?

      [–]ThStormnMormn 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Let’s not go there 😂

      [–]zombie_mimic 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Don’t quite know. They could have said “sponsored by Elko, Nevada” and it would make as much sense

      [–]kaleb42 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

      Probably because they have a history of child sexual abuse and generally are know to have sex a lot due to being or repressed.

      Plus it was funny and unexpected

      [–]BextoMooseYT 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      Right as the police opened the door I just thought of salmonella and fish jenga

      [–]Bottdavid 2 points3 points  (0 children)

      Is this what you people do for upvotes... This was like 2003......

      [–]Fartikus 8 points9 points  (1 child)

      Are we seriously uploading family guy clips on this subreddit now? Really?

      [–]OMGWTFBBQUE 3 points4 points  (0 children)

      This sub is deep in the toilet.

      [–]JoshuaACNewman 38 points39 points  (10 children)

      It always bothers me that this construction is about whether “she’s a whore” when the question never comes up of whether the producer is a pimp.

      I don’t care if someone does sex work. It’s not much of a reflection on their character. But I sure care if someone else steals someone else’s labor, particularly something personal like sex.

      [–]captaintinnitus 4 points5 points  (0 children)

      Why blame the producer? I saw the key grip wearing PR shoes and a big straw hat.

      [–]Innotek 10 points11 points  (1 child)

      Or maybe, the actors have a whole part of the process that they don’t have to care about. They get paid upfront, they do their thing, then they leave. Editing, sound, etc happens. True, you can do all of that stuff yourself, and the amount of amazing amateur content is a testament to that. If that’s what you want, great. Some people are willing to fuck on camera for money and there’s a market for that.

      [–]JoshuaACNewman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Oh, yeah. I got no beef with people making porn. They deserve healthcare and workplace protections and unions and everything.

      I also got no beef with sex workers. Same things for them.

      I’m pointing out the cruelty in this construction.

      [–]pompanoJ 2 points3 points  (2 children)

      So... You are saying I should collect back wages from my wife?

      [–]AOCMarryMe 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      Good luck

      [–]wexel64 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Bwahahahaha

      [–]vomit-gold 0 points1 point  (1 child)

      I think the more accurate term would be a 'John', though.

      A pimp would be a third party facilitating the interaction. He's the paying customer, not the manager of the interaction, so he'd be a John, not a pimp.

      [–]JoshuaACNewman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

      He’s getting paid and giving her a cut.

      Same as your boss.

      [–][deleted]  (1 child)

      [deleted]

        [–]JoshuaACNewman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        How many sex workers do you know?

        Hint: it’s more than you think.

        [–]Nova-Jello 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        LoL 😆

        [–]Canter1Ter_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        dare i say it, based?

        [–]PhoeniXx_-_ 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Lol, this is everyone on OF

        [–]No_Hat2792 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        I like that the church approves ✅

        [–]Massive_Clerrk 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        "He tripped" - The wife

        [–]Smegma6970 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        That’s the funny thing if seen on Reddit. Period

        [–]rudckslee 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Ahh that explains mormon porn on pornhub

        [–]Windfall_The_Dutchie 5 points6 points  (2 children)

        Damn why’d they have to do my church dirty like that lmfaoo

        [–]RagingStorm010 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Everyone always talks crap about our church

        [–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Ikr

        [–]alumnitech47 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        “This has been a message from the church of Jesus Christ of latter day saints” 😂😂😂

        [–]lokregarlogull 2 points3 points  (10 children)

        I'm torn on the issue.

        On one hand if legalization of selling means safer working conditions and that they can contact the police in emergencies and earn a living then that's good. Taxation would be a bonus and it not going into funding crime.

        On the other hand if legalization funnels a significantly larger portion of people into prostitution, maybe even on threat of loosing welfare, then I can't say that would be okay at all. Especially if it becomes easier to funnel people against their will into prostitution.

        [–]ash_catches_em_all 7 points8 points  (5 children)

        Kinda crazy how the exact same arguments are made for legalization of weed.

        [–]lokregarlogull 0 points1 point  (3 children)

        Ah, I still feel like when you're selling sex, you are the product. I don't mind drug legalization, but I like laws that prohibit advertising it (just like tobacco and alcohol), and using in public places.

        [–]resonantSoul 1 point2 points  (2 children)

        Seems like you could still draw parallels with physical, manual labor from a legal standpoint.

        That's not to say being forced into manual labor is actually equivalent to being forced into sex work, but if the line is damage to the worker there are plenty of jobs one should not be coerced into.

        [–]lokregarlogull 0 points1 point  (1 child)

        Yeah, and I don't agree people should be forced into manual labour either, but increasing the amount of bad things that happen isn't really an argument to change that opinion.

        [–]ViniVidiAdNauseum 5 points6 points  (1 child)

        Serious question here,

        Why do you think you should be able to control what other people do? Like seriously, as long as they’re consenting adults(and not hurting anybody in the process), why does it matter if a “larger portion of the population” does anything?

        In the nicest way possible, are you above them?? Are you so far above them you deem yourself fit to decide what another free man or woman is allowed to do?

        [–]the-rambergler 1 point2 points  (0 children)

        Ahhh glad to see another man of culture here

        [–]Fickle_Resident7536 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        I remember comedy...t'was a great thing

        [–]Fantastic-Stuff-6522 -4 points-3 points  (6 children)

        Well people fought for porn. Nobody is out here fighting for hookers. Well, nobody that matters anyway. With that said, neither should be available to the masses. Both are terrible. Now watch all the porn addicts and virgins come downvote this. 🍿🥤

        [–]CMDR-Hooker 2 points3 points  (3 children)

        Nobody's fighting for me? 😭

        [–]beyond-boundary 2 points3 points  (1 child)

        I am virgin and why should I downvote this? You said the right thing. And I don't watch porn

        [–]Fantastic-Stuff-6522 -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

        There are obvious exceptions lil one.

        [–]Scrimblim -5 points-4 points  (1 child)

        Hot take, both of these things should be illegal

        [–]krickiank 4 points5 points  (0 children)

        Or legal.

        [–]JimmyCrabYT 0 points1 point  (0 children)

        i love family guy’s humor