Promoting the Lucrative Industry of Prostitution
Have you noticed the recent campaign across all media to increase the status and acceptability of prostitution (well, only female prostitution)?
This article is just one of many recent articles providing ‘findings’ and commentary that appear to be aimed at normalizing and sanitizing prostitution.
We wonder if brothel owners are paying for these articles in some way. This seems likely given the challenges facing media businesses and their reduction in standards, including product placement advertising and blurring boundaries between advertisements and news articles. Alternatively, perhaps the articles are being produced by femaleist groups who recognize the huge economic advantages yet to be gained for women through the sexual power that nature has given them.
We have no essential objection to prostitution but we would like to see realistic consumer protection law and a code of ethics for that ‘profession’ including customer privacy, fair trading and adequate warnings to customers about the risks of using the services. We would like to see increase in the workforce and therefore competition to bring down the ridiculously high fees charged by these essentially unqualified people.
The recent waves of pro-prostitution articles of course don’t consider much in the way of the real problems and issues related to this industry.
So let’s get this straight ….. You don’t object to hookers, you just wish there were more of them and that they were cheaper ?
Comment by golfa — Fri 21st April 2017 @ 9:24 pm
Are they GST registered?
Do they supply an invoice.
If sex is an essential part of a working man’s life, as the article suggests, is this a legitimate expense.
Comment by Evan Myers — Sat 22nd April 2017 @ 6:35 am
With the state of familial relationships we have today, there are a variety of scenarios not excluding the possibility a young man could find himself in the position of having paid for sex with his mother.
Comment by Evan Myers — Sat 22nd April 2017 @ 6:48 am
Good questions Evan Myers! As in many other respects, when it comes to contributing tax the prostitution industry probably remains outside positive social contribution. Many prostitutes now work as sole practitioners from home and get paid in cash that they are highly unlikely to declare, and this will often be in addition to being on a state benefit paid by us all and/or by some man or men previously encouraged to impregnate them.
While it may be challenging for the authorities to detect tax fraud by prostitutes the main reason for a lack of detection will be favouritism towards women.
In a brothel some customers will pay through bank cards and it may be that the prostitutes receive some payment in a way that requires them to pay tax. However, brothels may still charge a lower amount for access to the prostitute and leave her to operate as an independent contractor charging the customer for the actual services.
We would be interested to hear from anyone who knows something of the industry to clarify how things are operating these days regarding charging, tax, employment contracts etc.
The idea that men need sexual release is well-founded, but little different from other basic needs that won’t be tax deductible. The idea that men need prostitutes for sex is one invented by the industry.
Comment by Ministry of Men's Affairs — Sat 22nd April 2017 @ 9:29 am
I don’t agree with your favoritism towards women statement.
The IRD held industry meetings prior to the introduction of the legislation.
It was then the single biggest group of delinquent clients.
They were chasing the big money paid by the business and criminal sectors.
The economics of chasing mobile Asians offering $40 quickies for the tax element isn’t there.
You could look at women who offer sex for say a weekend holiday and receive a high value fringe-benefit, but no money.
Especially if the weekend was already tax deductible?
Comment by Evan Myers — Sat 22nd April 2017 @ 4:08 pm
Evan Myers @5: Favouritism towards women is ubiquitous in NZ and will apply to IRD as much as every other authority. Just look at the outcome of most so-called ‘child support’ reviews!
We have read nothing in media about prostitutes being pulled up for tax avoidance, but quite often we read about IRD targeting tradesMEN.
As for $40 quickies, I don’t believe that is the norm in the prostitution industry. Hundreds of dollars per hour is usual. This one, for example, charges $550 per hour. And due to a need for secrecy for many customers, most payment to prostitutes will be in cash.
Comment by Man X Norton — Sun 23rd April 2017 @ 11:47 am
Ubiquitous, is an acceptance of the eyes and a failure of the mind.
I don’t agree with the direction from which you approach this.
Child Support decisions are Family Court Decisions conveniently avoided by referring them to an Officer of The Court hiding in the Revenue Department.
Comment by Evan Myers — Sun 23rd April 2017 @ 12:25 pm
Evan Myers, what direction would you approach it from?
Comment by Man X Norton — Sun 23rd April 2017 @ 1:59 pm
I can see what Evan is getting at.
You have suggested in the first instance that the IRD shows favouratism towards woman, based on child support reviews.
Child Support judgements over a man’s finances are written by an officer of the Family Court and are appealed to a judge of the Family Court.
The blame is wrongly attributed to the revenue department.
I agree the majority of payments will be in cash, but of low value. There will be less transactions as the value increases.
The value of transactions may include travel, airfares, drugs, vehicles, trades services, accommodation, and many other forms of payment.
Would you prefer the IRD pursue the residential underclass of the industry, or shall we say the minge-benefits of the high end of the market?
Comment by Downunder — Sun 23rd April 2017 @ 2:41 pm
Yeah, yeah, sure thing. The IRD doesn’t show any favouritism towards women. Just ask any male who has spoken to the almost entirely female staff at the IRD so-called ‘child support’ help line and I’m sure they will support this. The example of female-favouring administrative reviews, concerning which we have heard on MENZ Issues from many male victims, was only one of many examples. Favouritism is shown towards women in every sphere. Compassion towards women is on average much more prevalent than compassion towards men is.
Cash payments to prostitutes are definitely not ‘low value’ as shown by the article I linked. Other recent articles promoting what a great social contribution prostitution is also indicate the money is very good.
The Clark government’s law changes that legalized prostitution were always based on unrealistic faith in the idea that women are always good and discriminated against. There were grossly insufficient protections for consumers and for society generally. Prostitutes were given great freedom to ply their trade as they wish whereas other industries and even helping professions face numerous rules and restrictions. The Labia Party even seriously considered making it legal for prostitutes to push their vice while making the customers’ purchasing of it illegal. However, this would clearly have limited the industry and therefore women’s wealth so it was decided against.
I don’t actually know about how prostitutes deal with tax but, as I previously wrote, we don’t hear about them being investigated or caught for evasion yet it’s almost certain that they often get paid in cash and it seems unlikely they declare much of this.
As for an underclass, some prostitutes may be many are not. I’m not sure that people who earn hundreds of dollars per hour would generally be defined as an underclass. We have recently read personal accounts from several prostitutes who paid their way through university through prostitution or who otherwise found the ‘profession’ to be a thoroughly positive option.
I’m interested in the basis of the arguments against what seem obvious issues around prostitution. Do they result from female-directed compassion, trolling, or something else?
By the way, administrative reviews are done by employees of the IRD, not Family Court.
Comment by Man X Norton — Sun 23rd April 2017 @ 5:34 pm
It’s not surprising that Family Court judges ditched their robes.
“State slut in a black dress”
is the best description I’ve heard of them.
There’s arguments about selling your soul and arguments about selling your body.
What in your opinion are the
Comment by Downunder — Sun 23rd April 2017 @ 6:42 pm
You probably think I’m taking the piss, but let me add this.
My great grandmother came to New Zealand in the 1860s as a single domestic worker, in the days of
‘let’s get a few women to the country’.
She got married, had a family, her husband died at very early age, and she was left with four children, and by all accounts remained widowed and raised the family through prostitution.
My mother who had been the daughter of a wealthy businessman probably never in her wildest dreams ever envisaged living next door to a prostitute, but as it turns out she did, and all I can say, is thank God there was a fence between them.
I doubt these are unique experiences, in New Zealand history, and they may not be yours as they are mine.
When you talk about obvious issues to a primarily NZ audience, don’t be surprised if you get a few blank looks.
Comment by Downunder — Sun 23rd April 2017 @ 7:23 pm
Man x Norton @10; Drawing from my experiences, we could reconsider liberally using the term “Women”. In our case were three females, yet none of them mattered or have been counted in any true sense, let alone helped. Naturally the same applies to me, I was not helped or listened to and had no rights – still don’t. But it seems to me that the real villians are a selection of mostly females, who have extremist anti-male and anti-family agenda’s. They trumpet loud and often about representing “Women’s rights and safety” where as in truth they are exploiting the women for the extremist agenda. When my ex refused to falsely accuse me, they dropped her like a hot spud. Similarly my eldest would not be bent into telling lies either, thats why none of these females are helped or even recognised. So we should realise that the term “Women also captures those females who are innocent and exploited cynically by extremists of their own gender – the same ones who we have trouble with. I just fear that when we use such a general label for the extremists, we also capture some innocents. Its all in the name of that definition defying thing called “Feminist” and including Machiavellian behaviours which are about “Power – and how to keep it”.
And then with Kelvin Davis as an example – one does not need a uterus to be a feminist.
So what are the promising possibilities open to us? not many! I feel I should come up with some, but I’m sure if there were many, bright cookies on thhis site would have already thought of them.
They are using the media and sensationalism [most often without a skerick of truth supporting it – so is there some way to get/establish male friendly media?
I think we also lack support from males – those who have not yet been knee-capped may well perceive us as attacking their mums.
Clearly supporting mother’s sons is not a healthy option for the modern political career.
I think the best we have at present is this site and MOMA.
Comment by Jerry — Sun 23rd April 2017 @ 7:54 pm
People tend to talk about their winnings and much less about their betting losses. I would guess that the same is true for prostitution. As well as prostitutes themselves acting on a wealth bias, the news media further add to this bias too. A few prostitutes may earn large money, but in general we don’t seem to see car dealerships crowded out by prostitutes. I seem to remember complaints in the media, in the early years after legalisation, that there were too many workers and not enough punters, let alone rich ones.
Then add in the hazards that may come with the job, such as violence, robbery, mental health (ie damage to self esteem and identity), substance abuse, disease and having the people who give away babies take yours, then it isn’t really well paying once the hazards are factored in. I suspect that quite a few of the workers don’t think those issues through.
IRD may not get tax on every cent “earned”, but I would guess that IRD get a better compliance rate from prostitutes that earn sufficient to be taxable, than from many businessmen and corporates.
Downunder says:
I would rather sell my body, than my soul. But I work hard enough to avoid both.
Warn your boy and girl children about prostitution.
Comment by MurrayBacon — Mon 24th April 2017 @ 4:18 pm
I have no client experience of prostitutes. But I do know that some became very wealthy; well at least when I worked in the Post Office. One job I had back in the late 1970’s was locating toll debtors. There were slips completed by the operator for every toll-call. So when someone skipped without paying the bill, we would ring the numbers they called. Most often these calls put us on the right path. One particular debtor’s transfer charge calls were all from waterfront pay-phones. The number I called turned out to be her mother. Mum boasted how well her daughter was doing, so well she was building a large luxury house in the Marlborough sounds. It appeared that the debtor was hitching around the coast on foreign fishing vessels and doing well at it. I guess there are still ways to turn a fortune in the oldest-profession.
Comment by Jerry — Mon 24th April 2017 @ 6:47 pm
I guess as I’m not hearing about it, there aren’t any obvious issues around prostitution.
But there are issues about this article and the media and men.
MOMA will be familiar with the recent confrontation over a media release. By assumption I never existed in that particular transaction, and if I had written those stories, for various reasons, they would not have been published.
Where would the media find a bunch of guys who had attempted suicide, and get their stories out of them.
While I had a substantial element of control over what happened, essentially the financial benefit and credit for my work was taken by those journalists.
What’s happening in the media is another debate, but that aside, there was a favorable result for men in general, and a step toward a better approach toward suicide, in my opinion.
You can see a similar scenario in the article above.
Where would the media find a bunch of guys who used prostitutes and were willing to talk about.
They haven’t. What they’ve done is replaced the first hand men’s experience by substituting a combination of a prostitute’s opinion and an internet survey.
The territory I walked through, exposed men mauled by the Family Court.
A typical response to this experience was;
“I’m not doing this again, I’d rather pay for a massage once a week.”
While the Family Court was not only pushing men, who had never previously contemplated suicide, to act in that way, it was also turning men who had not previously comtemplated using a prostitute, to act in that way.
Comment by Downunder — Tue 25th April 2017 @ 9:37 am
Of course there are obvious issues around prostitution.
We have been discussing the obvious issue of income tax in this largely cash industry. Claims that prostitutes are paid so negligibly that the tax implications are trivial, are simply not credible. Are they based on white knighting, ignorance, or what?
Another issue is prostitutes behaving badly around shopping areas where children go, such as soliciting in lewd ways, leaving condoms, needles and other rubbish lying around and even urinating or defecating on footpaths rather than being bothered to walk to the nearest public toilet. We have read about this problem in various localities.
Another issue is criminal offences against customers such as theft from their wallets or extortion, for example using the threat of telling a customer’s wife, employer etc about what he has been doing. This can occur when a regular customer tries to discontinue. Sure, such offending can be done in any sphere but prostitutes are in an especially good position to do so. When men are subjected to such crimes they rarely go to authorities because they don’t want others to know they have been going to a prostitute. Even then we sometimes read about cases where a prostitute has been prosecuted for extortion, because the man has been prepared to go public. Realistic law reform would have set up a special, confidential investigation and prosecution service to deal with and to discourage the exploitative criminal offending that has always been associated with prostitution.
Another issue is poor service or a service that fails to provide what was promised. This can be related to yet another obvious issue around prostitution, that of prostitutes’ frequent drug addiction. That’s often the reason women become prostitutes, because it pays much better than any normal job she could ever get and enough to pay for the drug habit. If she is so out of it to be unable to provide a satisfactory sexual service, that leaves the customer ripped off. Again, few customers would use normal consumer protection channels to address complaints of inadequate or dishonest service. When prostitution was legalized a confidential and effective consumer protection system should have been established.
Another issue is that prostitution is a vice. I am aware of a number of men who developed costly addictions for prostitutes’ services. Other industries involving addictive activities are required by law to undertake some basic tasks towards ameliorating problems around addiction. For example, gambling facilities are required to display prominent warnings and helpline numbers about gambling addiction, and they are required to identify, counsel or ban customers who show significant signs of addictive behaviour. Bars are not allowed to serve inebriated people. Sure, these may be token gestures with limited effectiveness, but when it comes to prostitution there is absolutely no requirement to curtail addiction and the prostitutues are instead allowed to foster and to milk sexual addiction as much as they can, and they do.
Another issue is the exploitation of vulnerable potential clients such as drunk or intellectually retarded people. Again, there is no legal barrier to prostitutes targeting, manipulating and profiting to their hearts’ content regarding vulnerable clients.
Another issue is misrepresentation in which prostitutes pretend to be specially interested like a friend towards a lonely or needy man. I have known men who have been financially exploited through being encouraged to believe the relationship is something other than it is and end up buying gifts for a prostitute as if she is a girlfriend, or providing money for whatever hard luck story she has presented him, then being discarded callously when his money runs out. Although this is essentially fraud it is a grey area because the man is giving voluntarily. And although the situation for the man may be little different from that in some relationships with ‘real’ girlfriends, the fact that the relationship with a prostitute is a business one and involves highly personal needs and physical intimacy is important. Helping professionals are not allowed to blur such boundaries to exploit so why should prostitutes? When prostitution was legalized this type of thing should have been recognized and a code of ethics should have been required as it is for other service providers. Instead, the law reform proceeded on misguided feminist ideology that saw prostitutes as all being victims of patriarchy forced by economic deprivation into accepting sexual exploitation at the hands and penises of men blah blah blah. Yeah right, but male workers risking their lives on building sites, in sewers etc aren’t forced to do so by economic necessity?
Well there’s a few obvious issues to begin with. Quite frankly, a few moments’ thought would enable anyone to recognize them without me having to spell them out.
Comment by Man X Norton — Tue 25th April 2017 @ 12:06 pm
The few moments of thought comment is obnoxious and unecessary.
Not everyone lives in areas like you that see this first hand on a regular basis. There’s no demographic equality about this and new readers would hardly feel welcome with accusations of ignorance.
It is possible that the basis of the linked article is one sector of the industry trying to distance itself from that image, and they are getting free advertising through a client, to make the point.
Comment by Downunder — Wed 26th April 2017 @ 7:53 am
Downunder @18; I feel your comment seemed to be getting dangerously close to being personal. Perhaps you are right that not every person lives in an area like that – or maybe they just don’t see it, or don’t know what they are looking at. Lots happen behind closed doors. One daughter lives in a residential building. Her neighbour has done the game, is pregnant and suffers schizophrenia. So at least one mentally ill woman has earned some extra [no doubt undeclared] on the game. She can be heard through the wall having violent arguements with her other selves. Breaks windows. One persona calls police upon her other persona. Most of this behind closed doors. Would you know if there isn’t one near you? Or maybe the pros in your neighbourhood are upper class pros – upper or lower, drive a Merc or taking a bus, you can bet there are some.
Comment by Jerry — Wed 26th April 2017 @ 9:31 am