The Morality of Prostitution
A friend of mine one day brooded over the phone about some of her office guys being judgmental by thinking her to be sluttish (which is indeed a true misjudgment of her character). I pacified her by saying they don’t know really know her yet and asked her to give them more time to discover her.
Soon after I kept the phone down, I pondered why is being called a ‘slut’ derogatory at all? This ‘insult’ is not something new to this generation, or the one before. Prostitution, in fact, is suspected to be one of the oldest continuing professions in the human civilization. But calling someone a ‘whore’ has been an insult even not less than 500 years ago (which, for instance, is evident from many Shakespearean plays). So why is ‘harlotry’, or ‘prostitution’, or ‘sluttishness’, considered contemptuous?
George Carlin, one of my favorite standup comedians, made a case against it strongly — “Selling is legal, fucking is legal; why isn’t selling fucking legal?” There is certainly a logic to this. Prostitution is not something that is ill to health (when you don’t contract STDs, of course). It is certainly not an activity that induces violence or hurt to any of the parties involved (in most cases). It does not violate any human rights when the person offering the service wasn’t forced into this profession but does it purely out of his/her own pleasure. Prostitution is not something that is abhorred with respect to ‘status’ or ‘class’, for we know both the rich and the poorer classes have had the prostitutes render their services to them. In fact, prostitution is the only profession that can give its customer the highest physical pleasure possible. And yet, there is so much of a taboo that surrounds this profession and is morally reprehended by the general populace. Why?
The subject of morality is, well, subjective and the criteria in accordance to which I base my morality is thus: “If nobody gets hurt by your deed, you have done nothing immoral.” This seems fair enough a definition of morality, does it not?
With that definition as my guiding beacon and pondering again over how can one going to a whorehouse in any way be immoral, two reasons pop into my head immediately.
- DISHONOUR — If you visit the whorehouse without the knowledge of your faithful wife or husband who is waiting for you at home, or are kept in the dark, then you have wronged them.
- ADDICTION — If you are blinded and are addicted to the pleasures gotten from the whorehouse, then you cease to do any other activity and have wronged yourself.
Regarding the first, this can hardly be the fault of the whorehouse. It is the virtue and the duty of the husband or the wife to be faithful, not the whorehouse. This would be like putting the blame on the ice-cream guy for selling an ice-cream to a diabetic. Besides, it is not necessary that the spouse’s dishonesty manifest only by visiting a whorehouse, it might as well easily have been an affair with their neighbour or co-worker, for that matter. This is an ‘infidelity’ problem, not a ‘prostitution’ problem.
Regarding the second, this can be true of anything pleasurable. Take alcohol, for example, which has made many a million in this world its prey. But we do not ban alcohol just because there is a possibility of an addiction to it, do we? (In fact sex is more beneficiary to health than a drink. Or at worst, benign.) This goes for almost anything pleasurable. On a closer look, this is really an ‘addiction’ problem, not a ‘prostitution’ problem.
Objectively speaking, where does the wrong lie when a bachelor or a bachelorette, who is answerable only to himself or herself, visits the whorehouse? In a free society where premarital sex is considered acceptable in the name of dates, or in a nation where consensual sex is legal by law, doesn’t the scorning of prostitution by the same society or the constitution seem hypocritical? There is no harm in an unmarried individual (or a couple in an ‘open marriage’) having a good time for himself or herself (or themselves), is there?
Now that we have seen this from the point of view of the buyer, let us shortly analyse this from the seller’s.
One of the central reasons for the despise of prostitution is that many consider this profession to be a ‘flesh trade’. The idea that you can ‘own’ someone else’s body for your own pleasure seems to devalue the self-worth of the person who renders the service. The more pious and conservative might argue that sex is something sacred, and should be practiced only with the ‘chosen one’. The idea that someone can even put a ‘number’ to their self-worth and ‘give it away’ for a few minutes for the sake of someone else’s pleasure is unthinkable to them. Some may even argue prostitution tantamounts to slavery. This is one of the core arguments that is usually kept against ‘sexual objectification’ too, the term meaning treating a human being as a mere instrument or a tool for attaining sexual pleasure. If that be the case, and when one finds prostitution acceptable (but doesn’t necessarily practice it), are they also inherently committing the ‘crime’ of sexual objectification?
But consider this — when you ogle at someone who is hot, or have some exclusive ‘time for yourself’, do you not use someone or other in your mind or on your computer screen as a tool for sexual pleasure? Are you then not ‘objectifying’ your opposite gender? Is it not inherent in the human nature to want some promiscuity? You may argue, “But fantasizing about someone hot is restrained only to thought. Thinking of stealing from someone is not the same as stealing from someone.” Sure, but what if the other person too wants to get stolen? Would you stand between them to stop this ‘robbery’ even when it isn’t robbery for them both but only in your mind? Who are you to say otherwise?
When thought marrow deep, we realize that the ‘hatred’ or ‘despise’ for prostitution is only skin deep. Prostitutes are as human as the non-prostitutes. There is nothing wrong in what they do for a living, for honour is what we define. Who knows, by my definition of morality, many prostitutes probably might even be more moral than the ‘non-prostitutes’. A prostitute deserves the same dignity of labour as does any other professional. They are no outcasts and they have every right to enjoy all the privileges of the society.
Isn’t it funny that when we want to insult someone, we never use terms like “You murderer!”, or “Agonizer!”, or “Maimer!”, which are indeed the nouns for most cruel, malicious and truly despicable deeds that are actually morally reprehensible, but instead we use terms like “whore”, or “bitch”, or “slut”, which is a noun for someone who gives nothing but pure pleasure and joy to the ones who seek them?
Let me clarify again that all this talk of morality pertaining to prostitution as a profession holds good only when the prostitutes do it out of their own wish and are not forced into this. Prostitution rackets, unlike prostitution on its bare self, are very much immoral, just like any other extortion is. Crushing of one’s free will is self-evidently immoral and there is no denial prostitution is plagued by such rackets where even children are forced to do unimaginable deeds which words fail to describe. This makes my blood boil like any other immoral or unjust act. On the other hand, there are numerous prostitutes who have gotten into the field willingly, it was their conscious choice and their interests have to be protected too. A ‘profession’ is after all a trade where one exchanges pleasure for the money. A doctor gives you relief from pain for money. Similarly, a prostitute gives you orgasm for money. Are there not vicious doctors who order more tests just to get extra commission from the labs? Or are there not fake doctors? Just because there are many illegal issues surrounding ‘doctors’, you do not say, “Ah, doctors. We have to banish them all.” But instead, we try to work out a solution for getting rid of the illegalities surrounding the profession. As the phrase goes, “Mend it, don’t end it.” The same should be the case for prostitution rackets too. Legalizing prostitution might in fact reduce forced prostitution. It may even reduce rapes in the country (but I have no statistics to validate this assumption).
It is easy to preach others what you aren’t imposing on yourself. Hence, it is only fair I must be hard on myself and ask myself a tough question — if prostitution is like any other profession, will I be okay with marrying a prostitute? Theoretically, I am completely okay with the idea. But the practical difficulties do arise, such as she may be unavailable for me, physically (possibly even emotionally) most of the times. But if at all there is any reluctance for me to marry a prostitute, it is rather out of practicality and not morality. It is certainly not because she has slept with many men (and will go on to sleep with many more), I am not a hypocrite who watches porn innumerable times, but yet wants to marry a ‘homely’ or a ‘virgin’ girl who is ‘unblemished’ (as if a bride is a ‘commodity’ in a trade to begin with).
But leaving out marriage, will I be reluctant to befriend a prostitute? No. Will I be reluctant to invite home a prostitute for dinner? No. Will I flinch if a prostitute sits by my side in a bus? No. Will I distance my kid from a prostitute who is playing and being nice to her? No.
I am not asking for prostitutes to be treated ‘special’. All I ask of the society is to treat them on an equal footing as anybody else, similar to what the humanists of the 19th century asked of the society of their times for the slaves; only that the same for prostitution has been due now far longer than any other profession.