I meant to add that the Lib Dems are the only political party to take these subjects seriously. I have been consulted by them for their formulation on policies on prostitution and pornography. I am optimistic that soon Britain might be liberated by them, so long as the religious bigots are not allowed to further restrict our personal freedoms.

In agreement as far as it goes... my difficulty is that it would have to include a degree of regulation of the porn industry, since the downloading of extreme pornography involves persons beyond the individual or people downloading and using said pornographic material, and I'm not usre how one can ensure that pornography is produced by consenting adults or where the boundary of exploitation lies. Not in disagreement, just the one area in your proposal that gives me concern at the moment.

If people put up the existing laws on this site, can we link them below and also link them to this page ?

Possession of Extreme Pornographic Images under the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 went too far (or didn't draw a fine enough line between what is illegal and what may be harmless play).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7364475.stm

Would support you strongly with one major reservation: the protection of children must be a priority.

@francisd

The title of this Idea says "Consenting Adults".

@francisd: Is the protection of children more important than the protection of the innocent against malicious charges? It is crazy that it is illegal to have a certain pattern of 1s and 0s on your computer - too easy to hide, too easy to spoof, too risky to take valuable evidence to the police. (Slightly off-topic, sorry. Still, exactly the same problem applies to violent pornography, which is relevant.)

Personnaly I feel that there would be less sexual crime if there were less restrictions.
The effect of repression in the catholic church is a good example.

Indeed. If only adults who have given informed consent are involved there should be zero legislation.

The key word here must be "consenting"

The human race does need boundaries and "Do not commit adultery" needs to be upheld together with other what used to be 'common sense' attitudes of respect for our own and other's bodies. A person's own personal happiniess is not achieved by abandonment to an agenda of lust but by having integrity of behaviour and putting other people before the self. Humans need to be reminded and also kept to this with laws that make them accountable to their own integrity.

Sign the English Collective of Prostitutes petition...
There are several posts like this, you get to the point. The local council has powers to stop someone opening a night club or a chemical plant in the wrong place, so we don't actually need extra laws.

the state has no business legislating in this area of peoples lives.

Nobody 'needs' to exploit another person in prostitution. Disabled people are quite able to form loving and intimate relationships with other human beings you know! Stop using disabled people cynically to call for legalisation of the whole of the multibillion dollar, capitalist, misogynist, global sex industry.
CRIMINALISE DEMAND!
Follow the lead of the Nordic countries.

Another liberatarian idea which if passed would make legal male sexual violence against women because there would be no laws regarding rape and other forms of male sexual violence against women.

If this law were to be passed, chances of which are zero, there would be no way for women to charge a man/men with having raped them because the legal view would be that both parties were adults and hence 'consenting.' The fact that women as a group do not have the same socio-economic power as men as a group has conveniently been overlooked. Likewise adult women and adult men who are disadvantaged due to physical, mental, pyschological disabilities would not be protected by this law. Unscrupulous male sexual predators would target this group because they would be able to claim 'but we were two adult individuals and the other party consented to my sexually exploiting them.

Unequal gendered power relations has been neatly ignored by this proposal.

We must retain the laws regarding criminalising certain sexual acts and this includes the current law criminalising men who attempt to purchase women and girls involved in prostitution, if they are being controlled/coerced/exploited by a male pimp(s).

Criminalise Male Demand - adopt the Swedish model.

"Criminalise Male Demand - adopt the Swedish model."

I note your misandry here. It is OK for a woman to pay a young male then ?

No one said rape would be legal. "Consenting" is clearly there in the title, unless you cannot read or pref to ignore the fact. Rape by definintion is NOT consenting.

Those who want to criminalise truly consenting sex workers or their customers are simply NASTY VICIOUS people who are worse than any sex worker or none violent customer.

You are wanting to take away their dignity and their right to decide on what basis, by consenual agreement, they wish to engage in private activity, be it for money, or for love, and I despise you for it. You are NOT doing ANYONE any favours, or ANYONE any good.

--
Hello Dr. Tuppy Owens, my kind regards to you.
 

@Hecuba

For a scathing dissection of all that is wrong with the Swedish model do see this interview with an entirely voluntary, intelligent and articulate Swedish prostitute.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7D7nOh57-I8

She certainly puts up a far better argument than the feminist prohibitionists who post on here.

It is absolutely clear that no one is forcing this lady to do anything she doesn't want. So the feminists are wrong yet again.

These people talk about dignity, but how dignified is it to be told you aren't capable of making your own decisions about what you want to do, and taking your business away by criminalising your customers ?

An interesting discussion but let me remind people that the purpose of this website is to discuss minimising State intervention in the lives of its citizens, a political theory with a long tradition. As already noted, it refers to consenting adults. This excludes abuse of any sort. It took a long time to repeal many archaic laws around human sexuality, that seem strangely irrational to modern thinking. The end result of the decriminalisation of homosexuality has been a gradual reduction in discrimination and stigmatisation of those outside the dominant heterosexual discourse, and a reduction in violence against them.

A logical next step would be the decriminalisation of the exchange of intimacy and sexuality (sex work), as for instance in New Zealand.

And incidentally for any who think that the disabled are being used, I suggest you listen to both the disabled, sex workers and the research on their relationships. You might also want to look at the practice in other countries where the relationship between sex workers and the disabled is sanctioned and financed by the State.

Finally, can we stop blaming feminists? Let's recall that a large number of self-identified feminists advocate for sex workers' rights and for decriminalisation.

I'm surprised that a modern society has laws which restrict activity between consenting adults.

"Finally, can we stop blaming feminists? "

For myself I refer only to the (obviously feminist) people, who have posted to every thread on this subject on this site demanding criminalisation of the clients and the so called "Swedish Model" without caring about any ramifications and side effects of that. Not all prostutes are victims and some know exactly what they are doing and what they are about.

But I am aware that not all feminists are prohibitionists and men haters, and I for one take your point and stand corrected!

I wholeheartedly agree with the thread - Leave consenting adults to make their own sexual choices. Where someone is doing something against their will, then support them to gain their freedom BUT protect children at ALL costs - Not difficult really

Completely agree with this request, it's about time we are all left to enjoy a less controlling life especially when everything else is so tough out there - we need that little bit of time and space that only we exist in and control - that means no outside party of either affiliation dipping its hands in to our affairs.

Making sex legal is likely to alleviate the risk of deviant sexuality as people will practice their sexual preferences without fear. However there should be stringent laws on underage sex and child pornography.

I would just like to expand on the feminist topic. I think it is very important to be aware that a group of self-styled feminists have advocated strongly for the elimination of sex work, claiming it represents violence against women. They are entitled to their views, but they are essentialist - that is based on an ideological position that all transactional sex is involuntary and therefore rape. There is no rational or empirical evidence for this.

What one has to be very careful about are the hegemonic claims that they represent all women and that this is somehow a feminist position. Denying other women a voice, and ignoring men and transgendered folk who sell sex is an exclusionary vision that is hard to reconcile with the fundamental principles of feminism. This is a myth.

To take this one step further - I have become involved in the current very lively debates in Sweden over both the legitimacy and effectiveness of their current laws. This is relatively unprecedented in Sweden, championed by the women here who advocate punishment for men who purchase sex and intimacy. What I have learned is that contrary to popular imagination there are many feminists in Sweden who are very disturbed by the law that criminalises purchase. They see it as of dubious constitutional and legal validity, based on morality not rationality and harmful to both women and Sweden.

This debate, two months before a general election, is partly due to the resignation of the Minister of Labour after allegations emerged that he was involved with a sex worker. In this light he became merely the latest authority figure involved, including judges and police, raising serious doubts about the working of this law.

Just to clarify matters for those who aren't aware: Not all Feminists are like some of those who have posted in this thread.

See the group Feminists Against Censorship at http://www.fiawol.demon.co.uk/FAC/ for more details.

criminalising the actions of consenting adults because you find them distasteful. how very Labour Party.

AGREE. The extreme porn law came in off the back of ONE INCIDENT
which was "linked" to the form of pornography. Can't say I really care myself, but everyone knows the famous Voltaire quote!

... “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” actually written by Evelyn Beatrice Hall according to Wikipedia.

With the current laws how are you supposed to know whether or not you have transgressed the extreme porn laws? What exactly is or isn't extreme porn? Are the government going to provide approved and guaranteed legal porn sites that can browsed or magazines bought with impunity - that seems very unlikely.

The only fair action is to repeal these laws.

If there is no consent, then it is rape. If there is no consent, then it is a crime. But the converse of this is not true: If there is consent, then it is not a crime. Would not the laws be clearer and easier for people to understand that the act boils down to a single thing: CONSENT. With it, legal. Without it, crime. (For adults, that is, all you child abuse scaremongers.) Most of the arguments that say that a person can't consent to a sexual act are simply anti-sex.