Prev
Next

We must not list brothels on the stock market

Chris Gardiner

by Chris Gardiner

06 Jan 05:35am

Must Reads

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project - this is a caption

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project

41

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics - this is a caption

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics

60

Please enter your password - this is a caption

Please enter your password

39

Filed under: Brothels, Parliament, Prostitution, Society, Stock Market

150 comments

It’s tough getting off a slippery slope. But we need our politicians to build an off ramp, quick smart, on the slippery slope known as legal prostitution.

Cartoon: Michael Atchison

Even the hard-nosed readers of The Australian business section must have felt some moral disquiet when they read over the holiday break that the Sydney brothel, Stiletto, could be on the stock market in 2011.

There is something dystopian about a society where mum and dad investors and Super Fund bosses could monitor the stock market on their iPhones to see if their CEO has been working prostitutes productively enough. We will know what kind of society we have become if the stock is reported in the market round-up at the end of the 6pm news each night.

If you accept a harm minimisation approach to a social problem like prostitution you have to maintain your moral sensitivity to know when and where policy tweaking and intervention are needed.

Now is the time for intervention in this policy area.

We may accept small legal brothels as a necessary way of regulating the pathetic and unstoppable proclivity of many men to buy sex, and indeed as the only way to protect the women who end up in their service. But putting brothels on the stock market is a step too far. This investment must be prohibited.

Unfortunately, as the NSW Government has peremptorily prorogued Parliament, we can’t push through legislation that could ban what The Australian described as a ‘back-door listing’ in February. Barry O’Farrell must, therefore, warn that he will make the investment illegal, retrospectively if necessary.

This Christmas I got the TV series Deadwood as a present. Two of the key settings in the series are a low and a high-class brothel established in the frontier town of Deadwood to help their owners make their ‘wild west’ fortunes.

I’d commend a look at the two characters Al Swearengen and Cy Tolliver, owners of the Gem Saloon and Bella Union respectively, to any businessperson thinking of building wealth off what we once called ‘immoral earnings’.

Take a close look at these businessmen and see if you can explain the difference between them and you. And don’t let the distance between you as an investor and the shop floor reality, or the fact that you don’t let your hands get dirty like Al and Cy, hide the similarities.

Most commented

431Australia, you have nothing to fear but fear itself
390There's no one Thomson won't burn to save his skin
336Animal experiments won't cure me from cancer
313Thomson didn't answer the question everyone is asking
266Who murdered the Arts degree?
246A big day for Thomson, who thus far is guilty of nothing...
231South Australia. It's the middle bottom bit.
231Craig Thomson speaks. Meanwhile, in Australia...

150 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Grow up says:

      04:54am | 06/01/11

      You fail to establish anywhere that prostitution is a social problem rather than simply something you disapprove of. Last I checked, this country wasn’t run solely on the basis of ‘things that Chris Gardiner approves of’.

      Reply

    • Ducks says:

      12:24pm | 06/01/11

      Agreed. What is the difference between brothels legally existing and the private investors making money vs brothels legally existing and being listed. If you have an issue with it, dont buy the shares.
      He fails to explain why there is even an issue with it aside from a reference to a fictional TV show- clearly not a strong basis for any argument.

    • acotrel says:

      05:00am | 07/01/11

      @Grow up.  I don’t see prostitution as a ‘social problem’  when the girls are contractors, and there are no drugs involved.  I see ‘bludging’ as a social problem, in particular when drug pushers give free samples to little girls to entrap them into the industry.  I have a young relative who is ‘at risk’.  If the brothels get listed on the stock exchange, I will oppose them and work against them. As I understand it prostitution is legal, ‘living off the earnings’ of a prostitute is not! And the police turn a blind eye.

    • DS says:

      07:18am | 07/01/11

      acotrel, I think you will find that ‘living off the earnings’ of a prostitute is legal. Regardless, not all brothels involve drugs, and your relative will be ‘at risk’ regardless of whether they get listed on the stock exchange, perhaps less so.

    • Chris Tony Clabour says:

      01:14am | 17/07/11

      @ Grow Up,

      Whilst the country might not be run soley on the basis of things that Chris Gardiner approves of, you could always pop into any PCYC in the state of NSW where you will be sure to be told that, that organisation is in-fact run solely by Chris Gardiner, whom answers to nobody. 

      However I suspect you already know this.

    • Eric says:

      04:58am | 06/01/11

      So, we must discriminate between brothels and all other legal businesses because of something you saw on a TV series? That doesn’t sound very convincing to me.

      The least you could do is come up with some sort of reason to back your position. For about a thousand words, all you can manage is “I don’t like it, and I saw a TV show”.

      An attempt to restrict freedom in the public interest really needs better justification than that.

      Reply

    • Baal says:

      11:22am | 06/01/11

      Finally something that Eric supports, hookers!

      I agree tho, the brothel is a well run private business that pays it’s taxes and generates wealth.
      FFS australia needs more businesses not less.
      Using legislation to impede the freedoms of productive employers is not the way Australia needs to go. If you want state controlled private enterprise go to china, russia or iran and see how you like that Chris.

      I like agreeing with Eric, nice vibe for the new year

    • Eric says:

      04:58pm | 06/01/11

      If nothing else, at least this thread has convinced me to watch Deawood.

      Who knows, I may even base my opinions on it. smile

    • acotrel says:

      04:51am | 07/01/11

      Well the term ‘business ethics’ always was an oxymoron!

    • Eric says:

      05:25am | 11/01/11

      Okay, so I watched a few episodes of Deadwood. Great show!

      However, now the author’s analogy makes even less sense. Buying shares in a legal brothel makes you the same as Al Swearingen? Seriously?

    • acotrel says:

      05:30am | 06/01/11

      What is the difference between listing brothels on the stock exchange, and listing gambling companies?  Both types of enterprise are pretty down, and both exploit the public’s addictions! It must be a comfort to parents whose daughters work in the sex industry to know the actual work involves providing a comfortable hole for sleazy customers? Perhaps corporatisation and listing will make it more difficult for drug addicted sex industry employees to be exploited by their employers?

      Reply

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      06:14am | 06/01/11

      Since when has capitalism had anything to do with morality? War is good for business (especially if the corporation has a government contract). Sex sells. Since when has the corporation cared about the environment? All that counts is the bottom line baby. It is a bit late for conservatives to be having second thoughts about the whole thing…..

      Reply

    • iansand says:

      06:30am | 06/01/11

      Say I’m not a big fan of (for example) uranium mining.  No way that those evil purveyors of death should be on the exchange.

      Chris, I’m sure you are a lovely bloke, and take your moral position very seriously.  Just don’t try to impose that position on those who may not share it.  Mmmmmkay?

      Reply

    • Daniel says:

      06:36am | 06/01/11

      One could take the view that a brothel owner is providing a safe, clean establishment and an opportunity to access higher earnings for its workers. Legal businesses have to meet OHS regulations and discrimination and harassment criteria. Prostitution is a career that provides high income for “unskilled” labourers. Who are you to judge peoples life choices?

      Reply

    • AFR says:

      06:56am | 06/01/11

      Prostitution is a social problem? Please explain?

      Reply

    • True Believer says:

      07:11am | 06/01/11

      A not surprising dilemma for a secular society.  No regard for morals so anything goes I guess. Money is god and many are those who bend the knee to it. Jesus said “Love of money is the root of all evil.”

      Reply

    • Steely Dan says:

      07:53am | 06/01/11

      @ TB

      “A not surprising dilemma for a secular society.  No regard for morals so anything goes I guess.”
      If that second statement were true, we evil scary secular people wouldn’t have dilemmas in the first place.

    • HappyCynic says:

      08:04am | 06/01/11

      So you’d rather make prostitution illegal?  That won’t get rid of it and arguably the act of making it illegal would be even more immoral than listing a brothel on the stock exchange due to the harm that could occur to people who choose to work in this industry (not to mention the increased risk of STI and violence etc).

      It’s the world’s oldest profession (the second being politics but there isn’t any difference between the 2 professions) and everyone from popes to kings to the common man have used these services over the ages and it’s survived prudes and laws to stamp it out and more, bleating about how immoral it is isn’t going to get rid of the industry nor is changing our society to an ultra-religious one going to stop the practice.  (BTW doesn’t this Jeebus dude also say “Judge not lest ye be judged”?)

      As for the “moral” dilemma of listing a brothel on the stock exchange, how is it any different to all the publicly listed strip clubs, porno producers, sex shops etc?  Playboy Industries for example?

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      08:26am | 06/01/11

      Speaking of money, the Vatican has quite a lot of it. Love of money and all that….

    • A Bob says:

      10:28am | 06/01/11

      Jesus never said: “Love of money is the root of all evil.”

      Paull wrote to Timothy: “For the love of money is a root of all sorts of evil, and some by longing for it have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs.”

      Note the context. It applies to believers losing their faith due to greed.

      TB, you’re not very good at this Bible thing. You rarely quote it and when you do you get it wrong. It consists of a set of admonishments for those in the Church, the rest of us are damned anyway so what we do is our business.

    • Steely Dan says:

      11:51am | 06/01/11

      @ A Bob

      Good point!  Although Jesus was a bit of a commie (or maybe just an ‘end-times’ guy with no use for currency) - he did go to the effort of making a whip to drive money-lenders out of the temple, and trashed the place (John 2 13:17).  But he might have just been in a bad mood - according to Matt 21, he then went off and killed a fig tree with a curse after the indignant vegetation failed to provide him with food.

    • St. Michael says:

      01:19pm | 06/01/11

      Jesus’s comment on money was pretty well along the jealous god thing.  Essentially he said that a man cannot serve two masters, because you will love one and hate the other.  Therefore he said you cannot serve God and Mammon—the god of money—both.  Beyond that his only comment on taxes was to “render until Caesar what is Caesar’s, and render unto God what is God’s.”

    • True Believer says:

      02:29pm | 06/01/11

      @Steely Dan

      I don’t think secularists are evil or scary , just deceived and sad.

      @A Bob:

      You are correct in the pedantic sense, it is in Timothy however, as Jesus is the Word (Gospel of John), the Bible is the Word of God ergo Jesus said it, whether through a disciple or not is immaterial to me. I will endeavour to be much more exact in future discussions as I realise you do not accept the Bible as the Word of God, or Jesus as the Word, or as the Son of God.

      @ To all yiou liberal secularists who support the notion of prostitution as a part of our society I have a question.

      If you do, or if you do, have daughters and sons would you in all honesty be encouraging them, permitting them, condoning them, happy for them if they decided to make a career of prostitution????

      If you answer it no - why???????? Or is it only ok for the daughters and sons of other parents?

    • A Bob says:

      02:52pm | 06/01/11

      TB, you still quoted it out of context.

      And if my son or daughter chose to become prostitutes I would only be concerned with their safety. That is, that it is not part of exploitation by organised crime and that all necessary health precautions were being taken. I do not regard it as immoral.

    • HappyCynic says:

      02:53pm | 06/01/11

      @TB in reply to would I let my kids work in such a place?

      If it was a reputable place which ensured safety at all times, I don’t think I’d have much of an argument against it.  Would I like it?  Probably not.  Would I discourage my kid from going into such an occupation?  Sure.  But in the end it’s not my choice is it?

      BTW I’m no “liberal secularist” I just don’t ram my religion down anyone elses throats.  I also don’t necessarily support the notion of prostitution in society, I just believe that 20000 odd years of human civilisation has failed to stamp it out which proves it’s impossible to get rid of it now therefore it’s better (morally) and safer to have it out in the open and regulated.

    • remlap says:

      02:56pm | 06/01/11

      The “liberal secularists” are just happy there is somewhere for all the hypocritical neo-con christians to go and get their jollies without breaking the law.

    • True Believer says:

      03:28pm | 06/01/11

      @Shane from Melbourne:

      I wouldn’t know about the Vatican I am one of the millions of Christians who are not Catholic and one who is not dominated by any man-made denomination.

      @Bob: I am glad I did not have you as a parent. Phew!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  but I guess if you are happy being a cynic your comments are understandable. :0)

      @A bob:
      “I just believe that 20000 odd years of human civilisation has failed to stamp it out which proves it’s impossible to get rid of it now therefore it’s better (morally) and safer to have it out in the open and regulated.”

      Mmmmmmm murder, stealing, corruption, abduction, child abuse, domestic violence, have been on the planet as long as man and we
      have not welcomed them or attempted to make them into an industry - should we???

      Where do you draw the line when you have no moral foundational directions apart from what you think, read or decide is ok??

      @remlap

      “The “liberal secularists” are just happy there is somewhere for all the hypocritical neo-con christians to go and get their jollies without breaking the law.”

      Your proof/references for this ridiculous statement are?  I find it highly offensive.

    • remlap says:

      04:04pm | 06/01/11

      I just pulled my ridiculous statement out of the same place you’re pulling yours from.
      However, unlike you, I’m willing to admit my statement has a certain stench to it.

    • HappyCynic says:

      04:10pm | 06/01/11

      @TB it wasn’t A Bob it was me.

      The difference is prostitution isn’t hurting anyone or disadvantaging anyone as long as the client and prostitute are both their of their own free will. 

      Murder, stealing, corruption, violence etc. do hurt people.  That’s where I draw my moral line.  You injure someone physically, emotionally or financially it’s immoral.

      Explain to me how having consensual sex (for a fee or not) injures someone physically, emotionally or financially?  Then you many prove to me that it’s immoral.

    • True Believer says:

      04:48pm | 06/01/11

      @Happy cynic:

      Thank you yes I realised after I sent it that it was your comment.  Sorry Bob. :0)

      “Explain to me how having consensual sex (for a fee or not) injures someone physically, emotionally or financially?  Then you many prove to me that it’s immoral.”

      I would love to explain it to you, but methinks your cynicism would get in the way.

      A boxer allows himself to get bashed about for a fee and it is legal - do the punches hurt any the less or do less brain damage - I think not.  Is it a good way to earn a living - people are divided on that.  The boxer at the time does not let that stop him until perhaps the brain damage is so great…...................

      That injury of some kind occurs if one debases their body for money whether the person is aware of it or not at the time. It is no less an injury maybe not to the body but certainly to the psyche and soul.

      How would you have liked sitting on your mother’s/grandmother’s knee and discussing their job as a prostitute in the present or past.  Would that have made you proud of them?? Would that have given you a healthy notion of what the relationship between man/woman should be? (I am presuming rightly or wrongly that you are heterosexual) 

      If you had earned your money as a prostitute would you happily come home to your spouse/partner,  children and tell them about your day as a positive one?  Would you share it in conversation with friends, acquaintances, other relatives? 

      Think carefully before you answer. Words can be cheap.

    • Steph says:

      05:03pm | 06/01/11

      TB… It’s a nice try, but you might as well be talking to a brick wall. If people don’t want to hear anything that contradicts their own thoughts on things (IE everyone posting) then you’re pretty much wasting your time. Good effort though. You’re not the only person on the planet who feels that way. Chances are most of the posters already use the services of a brothel and if they did find them morally bankrupt then they’re trying to justify what they did as acceptable. Just a thought.
      (Not an advertisement for said website, just a place we can discuss the matter) If you go to christianforums.com and message Kitangel, we can talk about it without the overly-loud lefties scoffing and belittling our religion (even if we don’t do it to them).

    • Ducks says:

      05:29pm | 06/01/11

      @ Steph
      I don’t have an issue with a brothel being listed, but I don’t have an issue with people not wanting it to happen either. I can see why they feel that way.

      I find it interesting though, that you have a go at people belittling Christianity while claiming you have never belittled them. This comment seems very contradictory when written immediately below your comment which insinuates that everyone who disagrees with your opinion is morally bankrupt and only trying to justify their past choices.
      It seems to me you are trying to belittle anyone with a different opinion to you.

      * I have never been to a brothel.
      ** I am also a Christian, just a little more openminded than you.

    • True Believer says:

      05:34pm | 06/01/11

      Steph

      Yes I know it, but perhaps some may be capable of thinking outside their square. smile

      Thanks, registered but which forum? I will wait to hear.

    • True Believer says:

      06:10pm | 06/01/11

      @Ducks:

      Hello there fellow Christian.

      I think Steph was just stating as it is, perhaps a little strongly, but then given the amount of garbage hurled at Christians by some here it is understandable.

      I would like to know how what you mean by “open-minded”?

      It has been my experience that an open mind can be like an open window, let in the fragrance of roses and bad odours alike. Be interested to know your boundaries. :0)

    • True Believer says:

      06:30pm | 06/01/11

      @remlap:


      “However, unlike you, I’m willing to admit my statement has a certain stench to it.”

      Yes but unlike you I know where the stench of yours comes from.

    • acotrel says:

      04:37am | 07/01/11

      If there is money involved the religous amongst us are usually ethically flexible!

    • RobJ says:

      11:03am | 07/01/11

      TB whined:

      “ut then given the amount of garbage hurled at Christians by some here it is understandable.”

      Well if you’re going to dish it out (there’s a LOT of garbage in the Bible, want some examples?) You ought to be able to take it… Unless of course you’re a hypocrite?

    • True Believer says:

      11:30am | 07/01/11

      @RobJ

      How predictable - when I make a comment to you it is “whining”  but when the crowd you blindly follow make unsubstantiated comments, deride Christianity, the Bible, God etc it is not whining???

      It is useless I have found discussing the Bible with those who have yet to meet the Author as their ability to comprehend it is seriously deficient just as miine was before I stepped from darkness to light in Jesus.

      I wish you well.

    • RobJ says:

      12:23pm | 07/01/11

      I’ve read the Bible, there’s some tripe in there, the story of the flood, Noah getting two of every single species (kangaroos? Platypus), it’s rubbish. Tell my why it isn’t (Bible says so is not a reasonable answer)

      Your claim that it’s useless discussing the bible is true, after all you are coming from a position that requires an utter suspension of belief. Me on the other hand would relish a rational debate.

      “but when the crowd you blindly follow “

      Me, blindly follow yet you believe in fairy stories? I follow nobody.

      Fact of the matter is, you are not up to the debate.

      I wish you well.

    • RobJ says:

      12:26pm | 07/01/11

      “yet to meet the Author “

      It’s a collection of gospels and stories, compiled long after the fact, plenty of stories were omitted too. It was written by various humans to believe otherwise is odd to say the least.

    • Harquebus says:

      01:28pm | 07/01/11

      I say “Religion is the root of all evil.”

    • True Believer says:

      06:21pm | 07/01/11

      @RobJ
      “It’s a collection of gospels and stories, compiled long after the fact, plenty of stories were omitted too. It was written by various humans to believe otherwise is odd to say the least.”

      That is just your opinion and the unfounded non-spiritual assumptions of your fellow atheists It does not make it fact.  To those of us who know better your comments are sadly odd to say the least.

      @Harquebus:

      Whatever you say is really not of lasting importance.  Like the grass of the field you will perish and be gone and eventually forgotten in a worldly sense..  Religion will still always be here even though much is man-made and offers nothing.  In his futility man will create idols and worthip them or worship the things of the world.

      Jesus however, will still be there forever.  As He is remembered now so will He be till the end of time. He said “I am the way the truth and the life.”  Your opinion pales into insignificance in the light of His statement.

    • RobJ says:

      07:01am | 08/01/11

      TB, I’m not an atheist. What’s it like being wrong all the time?

      Just my opinion? Fine, then what are the FACTS? (not fairy stories)

      Fact of the matter is I’ve challenged you to a debate on the validity of the stories in the bible and you are not up to that challenge.

    • True Believer says:

      08:10am | 09/01/11

      @RobJ
      “TB, I’m not an atheist. What’s it like being wrong all the time?”

      I am sure I am wrong many times about many things, but my Lord is never wrong and it is Him I am talking about not me.  Perhaps you have more experience of being wrong than you realise?

      “Just my opinion? Fine, then what are the FACTS? (not fairy stories)

      Fact of the matter is I’ve challenged you to a debate on the validity of the stories in the bible and you are not up to that challenge.”

      You dismiss the Word of God as “fairy stories” then so how can I debate one with such a childish attitude.  Why would you want to debate what in your ignorance you dismiss as “fairy stories.”  One cannot debate when one party arbitrarily dismisses the validity of the subject. What foolishness you talk.

      The Bible is packed with facts, but your mind is closed to it.

      As I have encouraged you - meet the Author then try reading it. Then we can discuss it.

    • KH says:

      07:19am | 06/01/11

      Anyone who would ‘invest’ in such a disgusting abuse of other human beings, mostly women, is a lowlife piece of scum as far as I am concerned.  How could any decent person justify receiving ‘dividends’ from the sale of a person?  How could any decent person justify supplying money so the sleazy scum who run these establishments can get more slaves?  Absolutely astounding that this would even be possible.

      Reply

    • Steely Dan says:

      08:00am | 06/01/11

      @ KH
      Sex slavery and prostitution are not synonyms.

      @ Chris G
      As many have already pointed out, you haven’t made any arguments to support your claim that having brothels on the stock market would harm prostitutes.
      ...athough Deadwood was a great series.

    • True Believer says:

      02:45pm | 06/01/11

      Steely Dan:

      You do not know much then about the worldwide abduction of and trade in girls (and probably boys) into slavery in the sex industry.  Would our stock exchange be able to discriminate against those who choose of their own volition or those sold into slavery by criminals?

    • remlap says:

      02:58pm | 06/01/11

      TB:

      Your statement only goes to show one glaringly obvious fact. You do not know anything about legalised prostitution.

    • True Believer says:

      03:31pm | 06/01/11

      remlap:

      It is not a field I have studied at any great length although I have had to work with the victims of prostitution per se.

      I presume you then are an expert on legalised prostitution??? How interesting.

    • Steely Dan says:

      03:46pm | 06/01/11

      @ TB

      “You do not know much then about the worldwide abduction of and trade in girls (and probably boys) into slavery in the sex industry.”
      And why do you say that, TB?  Because I understand the difference between sex slavery and voluntary prostitution?

      “Would our stock exchange be able to discriminate against those who choose of their own volition or those sold into slavery by criminals?”
      It’s not up to the stock exchange to police that.  That’s up to… you guessed it, the police.  But having the eye of the investing public on the business may help.

    • True Believer says:

      04:27pm | 06/01/11

      @Steely Dan:

      I think you will find that sexual slavery, when a person’s body is offered to another for money is still prostitution, voluntary or involuntary, it amounts to the same outcome, sad as it is, in either case.

      I made no comment about the Stock Exchange - my interest is in humanity and the consequences in human terms of such behaviour,  not the monetary system.

    • True Believer says:

      04:27pm | 06/01/11

      @Steely Dan:

      I think you will find that sexual slavery, when a person’s body is offered to another for money is still prostitution, voluntary or involuntary, it amounts to the same outcome, sad as it is, in either case.

      I made no comment about the Stock Exchange - my interest is in humanity and the consequences in human terms of such behaviour,  not the monetary system.

    • Eric says:

      04:54pm | 06/01/11

      TB, I presume you are an expert on the worldwide abduction of and trade in girls (and probably boys) into slavery in the sex industry??? How interesting.

    • True Believer says:

      06:38pm | 06/01/11

      @Eric:

      “TB, I presume you are an expert on the worldwide abduction of and trade in girls (and probably boys) into slavery in the sex industry??? How interesting.”

      That is pathetically immature and offensive. Surely you can do better than that?

    • acotrel says:

      06:40pm | 06/01/11

      I wonder what the statistics are on the relationship between drug addiction and the girls who work in the sex industry?  Seems to me that legalising prostitution is similar to legalising heroin distribution?  But then I suppose Glaxo - Allenbury is a lisued company, so it’s difficult to make a ’ one rule fits all sizes’ situation? Next thing we know we’ll havre the Hell’s Angels listed as a corporation?

    • Elphaba says:

      06:59pm | 06/01/11

      @alcotrel, are you serious?  What about the plethora of drugs in the media/music industry?

      I used to work at a place that had in the safe, amongst other things, several grams of coke as ‘party favours’ for late night creative sessions.  They’re perfectly legitimate industries, and they too have a drug culture.  And just because the drugs exist, does’t mean you have to say yes to them.

      If that’s the reason to stop this in its tracks, we might as well turf several other industries out as well.

      You’re going to have to do better than that…

    • Eric says:

      05:36am | 07/01/11

      @TB: “That is pathetically immature and offensive.”

      I agree it is pathetically immature and offensive. It’s also an exact copy of what you did to remlap.

      Zing! :D

    • Steely Dan says:

      07:51am | 07/01/11

      @ TB

      “I think you will find that sexual slavery, when a person’s body is offered to another for money is still prostitution”
      Perhaps it is.  But not all prostitution is sex slavery.  They’re not synonyms, TB.

      “I made no comment about the Stock Exchange”
      My apologies.  It appears at 2:45pm on the 6th of January somebody posted a comment pretending to be you.

    • True Believer says:

      08:07am | 07/01/11

      @Eric:

      There is a world of difference between my comment to Remlap and your sad little attempt to jump on the bandwagon. He/she challenged my knowledge, I queried from whence he/she got his/hers - something that person saw fit not to answer.  A reasonable query even so.

      You were just parroting my reply and trying to turn it back on me, sorry, it didn’t work.

    • thatmosis says:

      07:35am | 06/01/11

      Get a life people. The women and men working in these establishments do so on their own volition, not because someone made them do it. Your pious outbursts are disgusting. If it came on the stock exchange I for one would invest. Money for jam with all the hypocrits going their for their jollies and then jumping on their high horses. As for the previous posters I find your references to a non existant diety offensive as a cover up for your narrow minded views.

      Reply

    • Kh says:

      08:33am | 06/01/11

      That would make you a pimp, effectively.  Anyone who lives off this kind of ‘work’ is a pretty poor excuse for a human being.

    • True Believer says:

      02:52pm | 06/01/11

      @thatmosis:

      Your proof and references for your assertion that “The women and men working in these establishments do so on their own volition, not because someone made them do it” ?  As per my previous post to Steely Dan there is a worldwide trade of young humans into the sex industry - can you guarantee that the one in Australia is exempt from such practices.

      Re your barb about those of us who believe in God - He does exist and you have no way of proving He doesn’t do you?  I find your rudeness towards myself and fellow believers shallow, ill-informed and rude.  I don’t think having morals and being concerned for the well-being of other human beings is narrow-minded. That is just your narrow opinion for what it is worth.

    • Steely Dan says:

      04:04pm | 06/01/11

      @ TB

      “I don’t think having morals and being concerned for the well-being of other human beings is narrow-minded.”
      But TB, we know that you’re not concerned for the well-being of people in this world.  They can suffer for all you care, so long as they’ll be okay in the ‘next’ world.  Which is why you reject out of hand suggestions that prostitution be legal and regulated to keep the industry as accountable and above-ground as possible.  For you the rule is more important than it’s effects in this lifetime.  Until you prove that the next world exists, we’ll carry on with the one life we know we have, and you can keep your ‘thou shalt nots’ confined to your own bedroom.

    • Mork says:

      04:18pm | 06/01/11

      TB I wouldn’t suggest you get precious about people attacking your beliefs after your diatribe about secularists being deceived and sad, lest you look like a massive hypocrite. 

      I would also suggest you look up “burden of proof” and “Russell’s teapot” before demanding that we should disprove God.

    • True Believer says:

      05:18pm | 06/01/11

      @Steely Dan:

      “But TB, we know that you’re not concerned for the well-being of people in this world.  They can suffer for all you care, so long as they’ll be okay in the ‘next’ world”

      Here you go with “we know” - well my friend you have not the slightest idea how wrong you are in that assumption/opinion.  As I have said to you before if your assumption/opinion can be faulty in relation to my outlook on life( it would be funny if it was not so wrong), then surely it follows that your other assumptions/opinions (there is no God) could also be faulty. Logical isn’t it?  Or are you infallible?

      I don’t believe I commented anywhere on the legalisation or otherwise of prostitution. Legalised or not it in no way enhances the humanity of those participating. Then I do not measure the quality of our humanity on its ability or not to make money.

      It is not about “rules” it is about human dignity and you would be scraping the bottom of your seemingly endless intellectual capacity to be able to persuade me that debasing one’s body for money is dignified in any respect.

      Mind you - we may be poles apart - I have a great love and regard for my fellow human beings, regardless of their situation or choices - and a long working life in human services to back it up. What do you have?

    • True Believer says:

      06:20pm | 06/01/11

      @Mork:

      Thank you for your contribution and suggestion. I read Russell probably before you were born. He did not impress me before I came to know Jesus, he has zero to offer now I can assure you.

      BTW - I am not “precious about my beliefe” - seeing as atheists consider it fair game to bait Christians with their futile calls for us to “prove God” it is equally fair for me to challenge atheists to come up with more than atheistic philosophers writings to prove God does not exist.  I mean come on - emirical scientifically proveable evidence He does not exist. You cannot do it and you know it.

    • acotrel says:

      04:49am | 07/01/11

      @thatmosis.  A girl who is addicted to heroin, and enters prostitution to pay for her habit, is hardly exercising ‘free will’?  And I wonder if there are ever instances where fee samples are donated for the sole purpose of entrapment of unsuspecting kids?
      @Elphaba.  Do the bikie gangs now run the music industry?
      GET REAL!
      I suspect neither of you know, or have ever even spoken to a pro?
      I suppose if the brothels become listed, there might be one with the name ‘Bludgers Inc.’?

    • DS says:

      04:49am | 07/01/11

      According to you, Kh, they are a ‘pretty poor excuse for a human being’. However, fortunately , I and others don’t base our morality on what you think. Personally, I don’t have a moral problem with it, and whether you do does not concern me in the slightest.

      KH and True Believer, there is a massive difference between sex trafficking and legal prostitution. Not only arguably morally, but also in terms of regulation.

    • True Believer says:

      07:59am | 07/01/11

      @Ds:

      I think you would be doing interesting intellectual and moral gymnastics to try arguing that prostitution of any form has any moral worth.

    • DS says:

      08:10am | 07/01/11

      TB;

      “@Ds:

      I think you would be doing interesting intellectual and moral gymnastics to try arguing that prostitution of any form has any moral worth.”

      Not in the slightest. I think there is nothing immoral about it whatsoever. No gymnastics required. Non-harmful sex between legally consenting adults, whether it involves money or not, is completely moral in my view.

      You don’t think it’s moral, fine. But don’t pretend that it’s automatically immoral for everyone else.

    • Steely Dan says:

      08:20am | 07/01/11

      @ TB

      “As I have said to you before if your assumption/opinion can be faulty in relation to my outlook on life”
      It can be.  Unlike you, I don’t believe any entity can be infallible.  But based on your previous statements, I think I’m pretty safe in making that assessment.  If God had wanted you to be concerned for this world over the next, he wouldn’t have commended Abraham for agreeing to kill Isaac.

      “I don’t believe I commented anywhere on the legalisation or otherwise of prostitution.”
      Did I misinterpret you then?  You actually don’t have a problem with legalising prostitution?

      “It is not about “rules” it is about human dignity”
      So your assessment of human dignity trumps divine commandment not to have extramarital sex?

      “you would be scraping the bottom of your seemingly endless intellectual capacity to be able to persuade me that debasing one’s body for money is dignified in any respect”
      How is it ‘debasing’?  You might not find it dignified, but some people have no problem with it.  Why not let them do what they want to do if it’s not harming them?

      “I have a great love and regard for my fellow human beings, regardless of their situation or choices… What do you have?”
      I have that too.  But I did it without the threat of eternal punishment, nor the hope of eternal reward.

    • True Believer says:

      08:27am | 07/01/11

      @Ds:

      It would be interesting then to know the foundation on which you base your moral values??  They do have a solid foundation don’t they?

      I mean more than just your opinion, or that of the crowd you follow, or your own interpretation of what is right and wrong.  Could it be your moral foundation is resting on shifting sands??

      You know the foundation for mine.

    • True Believer says:

      09:40am | 07/01/11

      @Steely Dan:

      “But based on your previous statements, I think I’m pretty safe in making that assessment.”

      Amazes me how you take the written word, whether God’s or mine and twist it to fit your erroneous assumptions.  I guess if your happy doing that so be it.  A perfect example below.

      “If God had wanted you to be concerned for this world over the next, he wouldn’t have commended Abraham for agreeing to kill Isaac.”

      As usual you use the Bible as a weapon against believers. You do not understand it so you select a verse and misinterpret its meaning to suit your own weak arguments.

      “Did I misinterpret you then?  You actually don’t have a problem with legalising prostitution?”

      I said I had not commented on the legalisation or otherwise of prostitution, you draw a long bow to try and interpret that it somehow indicates somehow I support it. Prostitution of any kind is a sleazy business. No amount of secular gloss can make it otherwise.

      “So your assessment of human dignity trumps divine commandment not to have extramarital sex?”

      God is paramount in all things, He after all is our Maker, that fact is not changed by your disbelief of Him. Some I guess cannot handle accepting there is Someone greater than they are. Detracts from them, not from their Creator in the scheme of things.

      I prefer His Wisdom on sexual matters to the loose morality some seem to favour.

      “How is it ‘debasing’?  You might not find it dignified, but some people have no problem with it.  Why not let them do what they want to do if it’s not harming them?”

      From your perspective of apparently “anything goes” in sexual matters you would be unable to appreciate the degree of debasement.  It is useless to discuss moral matters with someone who has no regard for morals only those they select as “moral” from their own narrow internal frame of reference.

      “I have that too.  But I did it without the threat of eternal punishment, nor the hope of eternal reward.”

      Wow that what a sanctimonious statement!!  Again you make erroneous assumptions about another.  For you information I was not a believer when I chose my career in working with the most vulnerable. It certainly was enhanced when I took the infinitely liberating step of moving from unbeliever to believer.

      I do not live my life out of threat of punishment or hope of eternal reward, but I realise your carnal mind cannot comprehend that so I do not expect more of you than that which you are capable of. 

      I realise the idea of unconditional love and the assurance and freedom which that brings would be foreign to your thinking.

      Have a great day. :0)

    • Steely Dan says:

      03:40pm | 07/01/11

      @ TB

      “As usual you use the Bible as a weapon against believers. You do not understand it so you select a verse and misinterpret its meaning to suit your own weak arguments.”
      How should I interpret it?  You’re very quick to say ‘you’re wrong’, but sluggish to explain why.

      “you draw a long bow to try and interpret that it somehow indicates somehow I support it.”
      I don’t think you support it.

      “Prostitution of any kind is a sleazy business. No amount of secular gloss can make it otherwise.”
      So you don’t want to answer whether or not you think prostitution should be legal.  Just say so next time.

      “God is paramount in all things, He after all is our Maker, that fact is not changed by your disbelief of Him… “
      I ask you whether ‘your assessment of human dignity trumps divine commandment not to have extramarital sex’ and that’s your answer?  Don’t ever complain that people misunderstand you.  If you don’t answer questions properly it’s bound to happen.

      “It is useless to discuss moral matters with someone who has no regard for morals only those they select as “moral” from their own narrow internal frame of reference.”
      Another non-response!

      “For you information I was not a believer when I chose my career in working with the most vulnerable.”
      What on earth motivated you to do that?  Could it be that the non-religious are (gasp) capable of being nice people too?!

      “I do not live my life out of threat of punishment or hope of eternal reward, but I realise your carnal mind cannot comprehend that”
      I’m the one who doesn’t believe that eternal punishment or reward is possible, so I can definitely comprehend it.

      “I realise the idea of unconditional love and the assurance and freedom which that brings would be foreign to your thinking.”
      I have unconditional love for people in my life.  And I’d never wish that they be tortured forever for disobeying me.  I’m very un-godly.

    • True Believer says:

      05:44pm | 07/01/11

      @Steely Dan
      “How should I interpret it?  You’re very quick to say ‘you’re wrong’, but sluggish to explain why.”

      You cannot interpret it - it is a revelation by God through His Holy Spirit written at His instruction for believers, the New Testament for followers of Jesus. It is not able to be understood by the carnal mind. You are currently blind to its truths just as I once was. When you repent and believe then you will have the understanding. Then and only then will you no longer be blind.

      Do you know the hymn Amazing Grace?  Newton, the writer of that was once a slave trader then came to know and follow Jesus. Hence he writes “Once I was lost, now am found, was blind, now I see.”  He was before where you are now, lost and blind.

      Life in Jesus is free gift for anyone who has the courage to do more than keep endlessly bleating from their own understanding that God does not exist.  It means putting aside human pride and humbling oneself to the reality that the human mind is limited of itself. To be open to believing there is more.

      “So you don’t want to answer whether or not you think prostitution should be legal.  Just say so next time.”

      Depravity is depravity whether legalised or not.  Legalisation does not make it any less depraved.

      “Don’t ever complain that people misunderstand you.  If you don’t answer questions properly it’s bound to happen.”

      I have no unrealistic expectation that atheistic readers can or will even want or try to understand.  I answered the question in a way that would be understood by at least 33% of the population of the planet.  That you don’t think it is properly answered is merely your opinion. No more, no less.  There are none so blind as those who absolutely refuse to see.

      “Another non-response!”

      Again just your opinion from your biased viewpoint. In fact surely your post is really the non-response, in my opinion that is.

      “What on earth motivated you to do that?  Could it be that the non-religious are (gasp) capable of being nice people too?!”

      That remark gives credence to the old saying that ‘sarcasm is the wit of fools‘. Surely you can rise above that?

      For you information I am not religious, I keep saying that in these blogs ad infinitum ad nauseum - but some here just cannot grasp the simplest statement.  I follow Jesus,  Jesus is not religion, religion is not Jesus. One day you will find out the difference.

      “I’m the one who doesn’t believe that eternal punishment or reward is possible, so I can definitely comprehend it.”

      You see again you make a statement as it is is an immutable fact - you don’t believe it so it does not exist.  I wonder if ever you stop to contemplate the possibility you may be misled??  You do not yet believe therefore I know you currently cannot comprehend it.

      “I have unconditional love for people in my life.”

      I would be interested to hear what your definition of unconditional love is?

      “And I’d never wish that they be tortured forever for disobeying me.”
       
      Could you enlighten me as to who it is you presume would wish that?  The God I serve certainly does not. Jesus came to set you and yours free of the law of sin and death. He willingly gave His life for you, for me for all - that my friend is true unconditional love.  It is not up to Him where you and yours choose to spend eternity - that choice is God-given to you all.

      “I’m very un-godly”

      You do not have to tell me, sadly it shows in all your posts.

      I wish you well. :0)

    • DS says:

      06:58pm | 07/01/11

      acotrel, a girl who is above age, and enters legal prostitution absolutely has free will. Her motivations are irrelevant.

    • DS says:

      07:06pm | 07/01/11

      TB:

      “@Ds:

      It would be interesting then to know the foundation on which you base your moral values??  They do have a solid foundation don’t they?

      I mean more than just your opinion, or that of the crowd you follow, or your own interpretation of what is right and wrong.  Could it be your moral foundation is resting on shifting sands??

      You know the foundation for mine.”

      My morality is based on a lot of things; my religion, my family, my examination of particular issues.

      I simply don’t consider legal prostitution to be immoral. The way I see it, no sex is immoral as long as it’s consensual, safe and sane. Just because money is involved does not make it immoral in my book.

    • True Believer says:

      08:21am | 08/01/11

      @Ds:

      Thank you for your reply.  I guess we will just have to agree to disagree. To me it is depravity, the debasement of the human body which God made to use it as a sexual commodity to be sold and purchased.  I cannot comprehend in what way such behaviour adds in any positive way to the benefit or our collective humanity. 

      You must belong to an interesting religion. Is it hedonism?

      For me morals are just that, immutable and not to be picked up or ignored as any person decides what suits them at any particular time.

      As Proverbs 21 says, “Every way of a man seems right to himself, but the Lord is the tester of hearts.”  Just denying Him makes not the slightest difference to how He sees you and what you do.

      Thanks for the discussion.  Have a good weekend. :0)

    • Eric says:

      07:43am | 06/01/11

      @KH - What is your problem? I sell my body every day, earning money with my time and labour, often risking death or serious injury. Prostitutes are workers, just like me - except they probably make more per hour.

      All this talk about “slaves” is just feminist hysteria. A job is a job.

      Reply

    • Steely Dan says:

      08:15am | 06/01/11

      @ Eric

      “All this talk about “slaves” is just feminist hysteria.”
      You brought to conversation round to feminism!  Fancy that. 
      KH’s statement was that it’s “mostly” women in prostitution (which is true), I don’t think that’s compatible with ‘feminist hysteria’ if it applies to male prostitutes also.

    • Sarah M says:

      08:49am | 06/01/11

      Eric you had a credible argument for once and then you couldn’t help yourself, you just had to throw ‘feminist hysteria’ in there didn’t you?

      I support legal brothels and think that it is a personal choice if a person wishes to engage in such employment or invest in it. My main reason in supporting it is to try and prevent the human and child sex trade (albeit some would argue this is misguided) . That is not ‘feminist hysteria’, that is a reality for people and their families that are torn apart all over the world.

      Please do not devalue a valid argument you put forward or demean and devalue a tragic issue with your obsessive anti-feminist issues.

    • Pellicule says:

      07:52am | 06/01/11

      Is Chris Gardiner aware that the Daily Planet, a Melbourne brothel, was listed on the Australian Stock Exchange boards in May 2003?

      Or is he merely ignorant? Or is he deploying rhetoric to warn us against poor investments in bad IPO’s, as this turned out to be?

      Reply

    • Chris Gardiner says:

      08:49am | 06/01/11

      Pellicule, my understanding is that the property, not the business, was what was involved in the listing involving the Daily Planet and that this is the first direct listing involving the business of prostitution

    • pellicule says:

      10:55am | 06/01/11

      So you favour half baked dissembling as a form of debate?

      Mr Harris said the Australian Stock Exchange had been supportive of the float telling the Daily Planet it was legal and legitimate business and the best run of its kind.

      He said annual turnover for the business is between $6-9 million from which the company receives $3 million in room booking fees.

      http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/05/01/1051382038749.html

      However much you slice, dice, equivocate or rationalise, your position is as thin as the rhetorical flourishes in the rest of your piece, full of dead wood, emotion and very little else.

    • Sonya Lane says:

      07:59am | 06/01/11

      I’m sorry but I got 3 paragraphs in and could barely keep reading.  Prostitution as a social problem?  It the oldest profession in the world and as brothels enter the mainstream it can only be a benefit to the workers with regulation bringing a safer working environment and better conditions, not to mention satisfying the puritans by keeping all this dirty business away from the children!

      You the go on to allude that it is only pathetic men who use the services of a brothel and it is only poor victimised women who work in them.  I forgive you your ignorance but you should do your research before spouting off such piffle.  We live in empowering times and many of the people, of both genders and all persuasions, who work in the sex industry do so by choice.  Their customers are as varied as the service providers and in some instances, it is their only option for a sexual relationship.

      I am a woman, a mother and have never set foot in a brothel but I have no problem with a fair, open and regulated industry that allows it’s participants to be a part of society just like any other worker, consumer or shareholder.

      Reply

    • KH says:

      08:41am | 06/01/11

      Oh good, so you think paying for sex is a ‘relationship’ - that is really sad.
      If these people want to earn money that way, then whatever.  My personal objection is that other people earn money off their ‘work’, and now, a third party who never has to set foot in one of these establishments can earn money off them.  That would make you a pimp by association. 

      Oh, and a sex worker could hardly be described as the same as ‘any other worker’.

    • Chris Gardiner says:

      08:55am | 06/01/11

      Sonya (et al) I have not made a case for making prostitution illegal, but a case that listing it as a stock for investment is a step too far. One may accept the reality of prostitution (most of which does not involve high class escorts) but still see making sex workers an item on the stock market as an unacceptable slide

    • DocBud says:

      09:38am | 06/01/11

      You haven’t made a case, Chris, just a statement. It is not clear to me why you think that small legal brothels may be acceptable but listing them on the stock exchange is not.

    • Chris Gardiner says:

      10:20am | 06/01/11

      DocBud, briefly, if you see a problem like the sale of women to men who are willing to buy a body, you may decide on a utilitarian basis to manage that problem through regulation and protections for those involved in the trade. That action does not mean you would be happy to allow the trade to be developed, networked and grown, and so you would prevent investment. You may also not like the idea of the growth of a portion of the community with interests vested in this form of human trade and who by self-justification of their wealth strategy become morally disinterested in the nature of the trade.

    • Seano says:

      11:13am | 06/01/11

      If anything commercialisation is a step in the right direction, cleaner, cheaper, safer and better regulated and reducing the number of people working the street.

    • Baal says:

      12:31pm | 06/01/11

      @KH
      Actually for many disabled people who are unable to get sex they have professional but intimate relationships with specially qualified sex workers.
      Many members of our society are marginalised, this includes people suffering from disability, emotional problems or just really bad social skills. Prostitution provides a valid way for these people to be cared for, for a moment in time by another human being.
      Calling people sleazy or pathetic is poor reflection on yourself and your lacking of empathy.
      I have has the benifit of finding willing partners in my relationships, but god forbid things changed for me I would not want to live a life devoid of the intimate touch of a woman just becuase some people think there is only one “good” type of sex.
      KH you come across as judgemental and lacking in empathy and offer no solutions, just insults and anger at an imperfect world.
      I suggest you put some love into these worls, maybe do some volunteer respite care or working with the mentally ill rather than what you are doing now.

    • Ducks says:

      12:38pm | 06/01/11

      @ KH
      “My personal objection is that other people earn money off their ‘work’, and now, a third party who never has to set foot in one of these establishments can earn money off them.”
      Look at the business model for any accounting or law firm. Accountants and law clerks and solicitors are charged out at around $150-$450 per hour and receive around 8%-10%  of that as their base pay. The people who profit are the partners. In fact a small business who pays its staff $15 an hour while making more would also fall into the category of making money off other people. It’s a basic business model without which our society would collapse. By all means, have your moral objections but please don’t use this as the basis of your argument.

      Also
      “a sex worker could hardly be described as the same as ‘any other worker’”
      Please explain why? The sarcastic tone of your comment did not make this clear. If you are referring to underground, black market brothels that exist in some countries where the women are forced into drug addiction so that they are effectively locked into the lifestyle, then yes I agree.
      But if people choose that work because they are unqualified and the pay is better than working a Woolies checkout, I fail to see how their choice of work disqualifies them from being described as ‘any other worker’.

    • James1 says:

      01:52pm | 06/01/11

      Baal,

      If disabled people, who one would assume receive the DSP, are able to afford to frequent prostitutes, we really need to cut the amount of the pension.

    • RobJ says:

      02:37pm | 06/01/11

      James, what a ridiculous stereotype. Just because one is disabled they aren’t necessarily destitute. Frank Williams? Christopher Reeve????

      “KH you come across as judgemental and lacking in empathy and offer no solutions, just insults and anger at an imperfect world.”

      Well said Baal.

      KH, your morals are your morals, you’re welcome to them but don’t be inflicting them on those good people who want to live life..

    • RobJ says:

      02:38pm | 06/01/11

      James, what a ridiculous stereotype. Just because one is disabled they aren’t necessarily destitute. Frank Williams? Christopher Reeve????

      “KH you come across as judgemental and lacking in empathy and offer no solutions, just insults and anger at an imperfect world.”

      Well said Baal.

      KH, your morals are your morals, you’re welcome to them but don’t be inflicting them on those good people who want to live life..

    • TChong says:

      08:01am | 06/01/11

      Chris, you do realise the characters you use to base your arguments are fictional , dont you ?, and that what the characters say and do is penned by the author. Deadwood is a TV series ,not a documentary.

      Reply

    • Chris Gardiner says:

      09:10am | 06/01/11

      Actually, whilst the Deadwood reference is not central to the argument, it does seem a good number of the characters portrayed were historical, including Al Swearengen, who, in addition to prostitution, ‘invested’ in dog and cock fighting in his establishment.

    • DocBud says:

      09:58am | 06/01/11

      “whilst the Deadwood reference is not central to the argument”

      It’s about one third of the article, Chris, and, as far as I can see, your only attempt to justify your opinion, i.e. if you invest in a brothel you are no different than these murderous, criminal, brutal mobsters.

      Portrayals of historical persons in fictional TV series do not constitute reliable or acceptable evidence of the characters of those people.

    • HappyCynic says:

      10:39am | 06/01/11

      @Chris

      If I remember rightly a sitting MP in NSW used to also be a madame.

      While the 2 professions are exactly the same (politics and prostitution), it does show that not all people who run brothels in Australia are criminals.  Some in fact may have a very respectable veneer and may not be involved in any illicit trades.

      Ironically most people (including you it seems) have a ‘romanticized’ notion of madames, pimps and brothels etc. that’s shaped largely by American fiction.  Your view of madames and pimps would probably be more accurate in the US (where it’s illegal) but I highly doubt it’s the same in Australia where many consider running a brothel to be a legitimate occupation (though discreet).

    • brendan says:

      01:07pm | 06/01/11

      Dog and Cock fighting?

      Could we please leave Joel Monaghan out of this? smile

    • Mr Pod says:

      08:05am | 06/01/11

      Why is legalised prostitution a slippery slope?  Perhaps you mean that they will pay taxes, conform to OHS standards and have super for staff.  What a slippery slope that would be.  Maybe there is concern that, as legitimate businesses there will be a record of customers ; )  .

      Reply

    • Ducks says:

      05:35pm | 06/01/11

      Ba ha ha. Yes and then people may discover that some of the people who publicly decry them actually use them (Not necessarily you Chris, just a general note that historically speaking this has also often happened)

    • Sludger says:

      08:18am | 06/01/11

      You say “necessary way of regulating the pathetic and unstoppable proclivity of many men to buy sex”.  Why is this pathetic?  This is their choice.  Because their moral code is not the same as yours does not make it wrong.  One could take the stance that we regulate farms as a “necessary way of regulating the pathetic and unstoppable proclivity of many men to buy beef”.  A vegan may see it that way, but I don’t.  Basically, you are saying you watched TV and you don’t like what you saw.  Not much of an article really, is it?

      Reply

    • Elphaba says:

      08:21am | 06/01/11

      Chris, I normally enjoy reading you stuff.  This however, is ridiculous. 

      It’s one of the oldest professions in the world!  There will always be a demand for it, in fact, it’ll probably be the only profession that will be resistant to the online takeover.  Even if they offer virtual reality helmets that promise everything of the real experience, people will still seek it out the old-fashioned way.

      So long as all participants are willing, and it is conducted safely (and I don’t just mean condoms, I mean security protecting all parties, the financial transactions are legit, etc), why do you care?  You don’t like it, fine, don’t participate - but you can’t push it as a social problem just because you don’t like it.

      I certainly don’t agree with anyone doing something they don’t want, or being trafficked into something illegally and without their consent, but any person who thinks there aren’t women out there who actually like it as a job are kidding themselves.  Not all strippers/prostitutes are turning to it to put themselves through law school.  Lots of women are making it a career.  It’s not a job I’d do, but I wouldn’t tell someone they couldn’t do it.

      They want to run it like a business, pay tax, and list it on the stock exchange, go for it.  It stands to reason that if it has survived virtually unchanged since we swung out of the trees, it’ll be here long after other businesses have crumbled.  I reckon it’s a sound investment.

      Reply

    • True Believer says:

      03:08pm | 06/01/11

      @
      elphaba:

      Being oldest does not make it any less sleazy today than it has ever been.

      ” It’s not a job I’d do, but I wouldn’t tell someone they couldn’t do it.”

      So you would not be at all concerned if your parents, siblings, children, grandchildren chose this “profession” to work in either as pimps or prostitutes??  Now be honest please.

      Incidentally your rellies may have swung from trees, but I can assure you mine didn’t so please avoid such generalisations. You have no proof they did now do you?

    • Elphaba says:

      03:33pm | 06/01/11

      @TB, you’re going to have to give up this infatuation you have with me.  It’s never going to happen, ok?

      I’m not going through this with you every time there is something remotely religious on the blog.  I have tried to explain my opinion, my thoughts, and why I came to them several times, and you belittle and deride me every time.

      So, you can bugger off.  Go annoy some other atheist.

    • True Believer says:

      03:54pm | 06/01/11

      @Elphaba:
      “TB, you’re going to have to give up this infatuation you have with me.  It’s never going to happen, ok?”

      How presumptuous of you child - I fear you do flatter yourself!!!!! :0)

      “I have tried to explain my opinion, my thoughts, and why I came to them several times, and you belittle and deride me every time.”

      You then have never belittled or derided someone on the basis of their Christian belief???  You seem to have a problem with accepting that my opinions, thought and why I came to them are equally as valid as yours and are not just there for you to tear them down in your inimicable way. :0)

      “So, you can bugger off.  Go annoy some other atheist.”

      I will decline your kind invitation to sodomy off.  Whilst ever you put up statements which in my opinion are open to scrutiny I will feel free to comment just as I invite you to do to mine. 

      This is a free country isn’t it - freedom of speech and all that - or is that just for those who toe the atheist line??????

      Loosen up Elphaba, your intolerance is showing. :0)

    • Andrew says:

      08:28am | 06/01/11

      Just to remove any doubt, would you please state whether religion has anything to do with your point of view on this matter, Chris?

      Reply

    • Chris Gardiner says:

      09:00am | 06/01/11

      Andrew, I am an agnostic (politically, a conservative liberal). You may have to address the issue now rather than dismiss the argument on the assumption that it comes from a person with religious views (who, presumably, you don’t take as having justifiable views)

    • Andrew says:

      09:37am | 06/01/11

      Not an assumption, just a query I felt should be dealt with.  I simply don’t think it valid for people to be against something because, for example, of what they hear it says in the Bible, rather than thinking about the issues, which is why I asked.

    • True Believer says:

      03:40pm | 06/01/11

      @Andrew:

      I would have been against prostitution before I became a Christian I assure you.  There are many out there who may not subscribe to a faith, but they do subscribe to some degree of decency in human relations. 

      It was no shame to have morals when I grew up, for me there is no shame in having them now.  These days for some it seems trendy to have none - follow the crowd I guess.

    • Seano says:

      08:34am | 06/01/11

      Yes because we want prostitution kept to back alleys, unmonitored and run by criminals. Real smart.

      Reply

    • St. Michael says:

      01:22pm | 06/01/11

      Besides, how will turning them into corporations and listing them on the ASX make them any different to that?

    • Seano says:

      03:08pm | 06/01/11

      You’re kidding right? Besides the fact that business have to comply with regulation any legitimate business worth it’s salt wants to look after its assets and grow their customer base.

    • St. Michael says:

      01:21am | 07/01/11

      Yes, I am. smile

    • Rossco says:

      08:38am | 06/01/11

      How is a legalised brothel traded on the stock market any worse then trading in stocks of defense companies, private security firms, or large organisations responsible for pollution and child slavery across the world?

      Why is it when it ever comes down to sex some people, mostly religious, get all fuddy duddy - but other things like war, child slavery, and pollution are largely ignored? Priorities are completely wrong.

      Reply

    • grumpy old man says:

      08:48am | 06/01/11

      Chris,
      I presume you wrote this article to create some discussion in what is otherwise a quite time for journo’s.
      If, as your article strongly suggests, you form you views on society by watching fictional TV series ( a very good one in this case,  I must add), then you are truly living in a world populated by some strange characters. Did you form your views on the laws of the land by watching “who framed roger rabbit?”, or your views on animal cruelty by watching “Bambi”? Perhaps your views on social justice come from “Animal Farm”? Difficult then to take your opinions seriously. But perhaps that was your intention

      Reply

    • DocBud says:

      10:20am | 06/01/11

      I rather suspect that George Orwell hoped that people would form their views on the nature of Stalinist communism, and hence social justice as it relates to authoritarian regimes, in part from reading his allegorical novel.

    • Just Sayin' says:

      03:16pm | 06/01/11

      Allegorical novel? Stalinist communism? Social justice? Authoritarian regimes?

      I thought it was about pigs?

    • grumpy old man says:

      08:15am | 07/01/11

      DocBud,
      don’t know about forming views, but certainly creating food for thought and making people think. We could benefit from re reading it and applying it to todays governments, especially “all animals are equal, some animals are more equal than others”, or words to that effect. Might send a copy to Gerry Harvey!

    • Andrew says:

      09:12am | 06/01/11

      Just yesterday, I heard about sex workers who give some people (for example, some disabled people) something they might otherwise never experience: an intimate, human, sexual touch. In any debate about prostitution, we should never leave out the importance of this service. To go through life without ever having experienced this is to be less than fully human.

      Reply

    • Zeta says:

      09:22am | 06/01/11

      Melbourne’s The Daily Planet brothel has been listed on the ASX since the late 1990s and the world hasn’t ended.

      Reply

    • HappyCynic says:

      10:02am | 06/01/11

      Playboy has been a publicly listed company for much longer and the world hasn’t ended either, Hustler is also publicly listed and so are a number of others smile

      Apparently only the assets of the Daily Planet have been publicly listed not the services offered inside those assets (same-same though)

    • Zebba says:

      09:36am | 06/01/11

      In Deadwood, I find Al (Gem Saloon) to be a far more moral character than George Hearst, but we still allow investment in mining corporations…

      That is not to say that Al is what I would consider a moral person, but he is a far better man than George “the color [sic]” Hearst

      Reply

    • Tezza says:

      10:54am | 06/01/11

      Chris Gardiner: get a life! Or at least learn to recognise how good art holds a mirror up to reality. Great art does not necessarily have to depict only moral characters, and the character of Al Swearingen in the Deadwood televison series is definitely not a character on whom to ground an argument for the simple immorality of brothel keepers. Swearingen is frankly a wonderful, shakespearean character, well written, extremely well acted and yes fundamentally moral, despite being the proprietor of a saloon in a roaring frontier town where (amongst other things) a few dance hall prostitutes are employed.
      Another example of a television character whose surface behaviour (swearing, drinking, taking drugs and shagging females on all sides) hides a truly moral person is the character of Hank Moody in that wonderful television series “Californication”. O.K. I may still be having trouble convincing my wife that Hank Moody is one of the good guys, but there it is, my opinion. Don’t like american television as a rule but love this series, as I loved Deadwood and indeed The Sopranos (Tony Soprano - another shakespearean character whose personal morality transcends the bad things he does during the day). And even you, Chris Gardiner, are not all bad. You are, after all, an agnostic lapsed catholic, so I guess you can be forgiven your reactionary views on brothels - just don’t try to force them onto others.

    • RobJ says:

      02:45pm | 06/01/11

      Beautiful Zebba, you wouldn’t catch George Hearst on his hands and knees scrubbing the blood because Jewel wasn’t up to it.

      Maybe Chris likes Hearst, after all he did employ a murderer, who murdered prostitutes as it happens.

      Chris wrote:

      “Take a close look at these businessmen and see if you can explain the difference between them and you. And don’t let the distance between you as an investor and the shop floor reality, or the fact that you don’t let your hands get dirty like Al and Cy, hide the similarities. “

      So Chris, if you’re going to hold up Toliver and Swerengen as examples of the scum that run brothels then why ignore the utter prick who wanted to get ALL THE YELLOW for himself?  By your rationale minerals companies shouldn’t be floated on the stock exchange, Then there’s companies like Shell and Nigeria, far more damaging to (Nigerian) society than any Aussie Pimp or madame…

      What are your thoughts on Union Carbide?

    • Elphaba says:

      03:43pm | 06/01/11

      @RobJ, as an aside, I love Swearengen and Jewel.  He gives her so much stick and she just gives it back.  Classic. grin

    • RobJ says:

      08:38am | 07/01/11

      Elphaba, Deadwood was one of the most enjoyable TV shows ever. Props to the author at least for citing Deadwood.

    • Elphaba says:

      10:21am | 07/01/11

      @RobJ, my parents got me onto it, it just blew my mind.  I was so bummed when it ended, they kicked around the idea of a movie to tie it all up for a while, but it never came to fruition.

      But it’s better to leave you wanting more than overstaying its welcome, I guess. grin

      One of the only other TV characters I’ve seen that rivals for my affections over Al Swearengen was Gene Hunt in Life On Mars/Ashes to Ashes.

    • devil's advocate says:

      09:49am | 06/01/11

      We may accept defence contractors as a necessary way of regulating the pathetic and unstoppable proclivity of many countries to buy bombs, and indeed as the only way to protect the soldiers who end up in their service. But putting defence contractors on the stock market is a step too far. This investment must be prohibited.

      Reply

    • Jordan Rastrick says:

      10:53am | 06/01/11

      Chris, I’ve looked at some of what you’ve previously written here and its generally pretty reasonable and well justified. So I’ll give you of the doubt.

      First of all, really, Deadwood? Other people have already pointed out in great detail how flimsy this is. Surely you could at least have pointed to actual historical brothel owners of dubious character. I’ve been reading the excellent book Razor lately, and Tilly Devine was a perfect (and local) example of a thoroughly criminal brothel empire mistress. But then… that case might have drawn comparisons with her rival Kate Leigh, who was an equally bad owner of, well, pubs that stayed open after 6 pm. Deary me, I guess legitimising businesses that once fuelled organise crime doesn’t necessarily turn out so bad after all?

      Second, and more to the point, what is it about people owning brothels via publicly listed shares that somehow escalates the moral gravity of the situation? Why is that the dividing line? We *need* to tolerate legal brothels, but brothels with a slightly legal ownership mechanism - heavens no!! Bank loans for prostitution yay, equity based capital nay… for some reason.

      Why, exactly? Given you explicitly made this a slippery slope argument (and those tend to be pretty shoddy for the most part) - what’s the slope in this case? What do you fear we are sliding towards? Prostitution becoming drastically more socially acceptable and thus widespread if we don’t keep it quasi-illegitimate in the eyes of the law? If anything the experience with drug usage rates in countries that have decriminalised suggests the opposite might happen.

      You call yourself a conserative liberal. Does this mean you’re against state intervention in areas of private morality that you happen not to have a strong personal reaction against, like compulsory scripture classes, but you draw the line when you do personally object? That seems to be the pattern. I’m sorry to say it, but that’s not liberalism, it’s hypocricy. Drop the liberal, call yourself a conservative (who happens to be incidentally a bit more open minded on some issues) and be done with it.

      Reply

    • stephen says:

      11:22am | 06/01/11

      I’d like to see them in the phone-book, right behind ‘launderymat’.
      (If yer only gotta make one phone-call then yer can spend more on the ‘dryin cycle’.)

      Reply

    • Austin 3:16 says:

      11:29am | 06/01/11

      So buying shares in a company that sells tobacco would still be ok right? Or buying shares in a company that manufactures weapons ?

      But not a brothel, why? Is sex somehow worse than killing people ?

      Reply

    • TChong says:

      12:15pm | 06/01/11

      Austin, well said.
      The strange, creepy, bizarre mentality that equates weapons , the manufacure and use of to kill people as some how noble , while anything to do with consensual sex is considered “amoral” .

    • Just Sayin' says:

      04:31pm | 06/01/11

      It’s reflected in other aspects of our culture.

      On TV and in films and video games, it is apparently okay to show extreme acts of violence that will never be part of everyday life for almost all human beings.  On the other hand, we make sure that sex and nudity are severely limited in the same media, despite the fact that most human being are frequently nude and regularly have sex.  Everyone’s mother had sex at least once, even mine.

      The double standard is absurd.

    • Sam Chowder says:

      11:41am | 06/01/11

      Brothels listed on the stock market could transform dull financial news into hilarious “Carry On” one liners.

      Reply

    • Jordan Rastrick says:

      11:42am | 06/01/11

      Sorry Zebba, I should have made it clear I’d already read and discounted the noted historicity of Al Swearegen, due to that critical “whilst taking artistic license” disclaimer - i.e. Chris specifically asks us to form an opinion of brothel ownership based not on a person living in a remote historical era in a different country, but in fact on the depiction of a fictional character based loosely on such a person. So we’re not consdering (heavens forbid) actual data, nor a lone anecdote, nor a barely relevant lone anecdote, but in fact a piece of imaginative invention that happened to be inspired by a barely relevant lone anecdote. That’s so absurdly far removed from an actual argument about real brothel ownership in 21st century Australia that its quite surprising a person as intelligent and articulate as Chris is making it - as nearly everyone commenting on that point has noticed. Which I think just points to the overall weakness of his objections.

      Reply

    • RobJ says:

      12:06pm | 06/01/11

      As per Austin, Sex is great, some people can’t get it unless they visit a brothel (the disabled for example) WYou may be morally opposed to brothels being listed on the stock exchange but unless you state that tobacco companies should not be listed I’m going to fairly assume that you think sex is bad and lethal addictive drugs (peddled to children) are OK. So c’mon. write a list of other industries that shouldn’t be listed…

      Reply

    • Steven says:

      01:08pm | 06/01/11

      Your proof of the reason why religion should have nothing to do with Politics/Government/Law etc…  I see most of your stories in the past have as religious basis.

      Yet what about Weapon manufacturers?  Should super-fund mangers & mum/dad investors buy shares in a Gun or Bomb factory?  They are made to kill people after all, why don’t you consider that a social problem?

      Even though prostitution has been shown to reduce a REAL social problems like Rape.  You forget about other more serious social problems.

      What about Alcohol that kills so many and ruins so many lives?  What about Fast Food that’s unhealthy and makes many of us fat?  ...oh but sex is the real problem in society, what I’d love to know is how?  Or is this just an excuse to cover why you really don’t like it, which is your religion!  I’m a catholic too by the way.

      You also seem to forget that this has already happened in Victoria.

      Here’s a tip, build a bridge and get over it!

      Reply

    • Just Sayin' says:

      02:36pm | 06/01/11

      Agreed.

      And there are plenty of ‘ethical investment’ funds that avoid investing in alcohol, tobacco, gambling and weapons, amongst other things.  It won’t be hard for them to add prostitution to their blacklist.  I’m have no problem with giving people ethical investment options, just as I have no problem allowing people to invest in sex, drugs and rock and roll.

      Party on.

    • Dave says:

      02:10pm | 06/01/11

      What’s with all the hysteria? The Daily Planet (a brothel in Elsternwick) was listed on the ASX years ago. And the world didn’t stop turning. Take a chill pill Sydney and join the rest of the world in the 21st century.

      Reply

    • Elphaba says:

      05:23pm | 06/01/11

      A few people have said this now - does anyone know what the share prices are or how successful it is?  I think it’d be interesting…

    • rod sexton says:

      02:52pm | 06/01/11

      Who is Chris Gardner? is he a Fred Nile relative?

      Reply

    • guy lee hanlon says:

      07:32pm | 06/01/11

      do brothel countries like thailand and the Phillipines list their most important industries ( brothel industries) on their stock exchanges??
      can Australia become a brothel country for male tourists to get all important tourist dollars and tourist numbers??

      Reply

    • Andrew says:

      02:17pm | 07/01/11

      ASX Code: PPN!  While not in the same league of BHP, Rio, or even our stellar Telstra.  It is there on the ASX.  So why can’t more be there?  Dividend payments could be used as credit…..... no, no, sorry smile  It’s friday….

      Reply

    • Ben says:

      03:28am | 08/01/11

      wait…so it’s pathetic to buy sex, but not to sell sex? Even if this offensive double standard was true, then surely it should be allowed on the stock market? After all, we allow alcohol manufactures to be on the stock market and it’s fair to say its pathetic to buy alcohol (due to addiction and dangers) but somehow its not pathetic to sell it ($$$)

      Reply

    • anon says:

      06:53am | 10/01/11

      Wonder how many other legal businesses no longer give their employees shifts because they refuse to take drugs with their clients and fine them for not having painted nails, appropriate makeup, ladders in their stockings or various other ways to cut into the earnings of girls that are generally doing a job they don’t want to do. Which is why most of the girls take drugs, to numb themselves.

      Reply

    • Dianne says:

      11:08am | 11/01/11

      @TB…actually, sorry to tell you that in the years I was a sex worker, MANY of my clients were Christians and Muslims. This is the painful truth.
      Also, I wouldn’t mind my daughter doing the work, but because of society’s judgemental people, I wouldn’t recomend it. It’s hard to have to lie all the time because of the fear of being loathed and judged by people who don’t understand it.  The actual work itself can be immensely satisfying, as it is a psychological service more so than a purely a physical one. In fact many people, believe it or not, cant wait to get the sex finished so they can TALK to someone who isn’t going to jusge them in any way.

      Reply

    • True Believer says:

      06:11pm | 14/01/11

      @Dianne:

      I never said people who say they are Christians are perfect. Any true Christian knows they are just forgiven sinners.  If some turn back to sin that is sad, but their choice.

      I too have listened non-judgmentally to many, many people’s problems, but I never had to involve myself in a sexual encounter to do it.  Perhaps had you undertaken appropriate training to help people rather than using your body you may have been able to help many more, who knows but the Lord.

      Even so, Jesus never turns away any sinner if they turn to Him with an honest heart.  He welcomed sinners and said “I did not come to save the righteous, I came to save sinners.”  He is there for you as much as He was there for me when I turned from unbelief. 

      I wish you well.

 
Comment

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 09:27PM

Dementor doing a good job for sweden #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 09:11PM

Ukraine song pinches chord progression from The Verve's Bittersweet Symphony. Fo real #sbseurovision

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 09:00PM

RT @GerardDaffy: @antsharwood all the talk over there is the grannies will win.they entered to get a church built,feelgood story

Anthony Sharwood

antsharwood 26 May 12 08:57PM

These peole insult my grandmothjer, who was born in minsk, belarus #sbseurovision

See all tweets

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

by David Penberthy

0

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

by Paul Toohey

0

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

by Angela Mollard

0

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Light weight

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter

Subscribe to The Punch RSS feed