Site Search:
 
TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Why there is so much prostitution in Korea
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 13, 14, 15  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Fox



Joined: 04 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Thu May 30, 2013 9:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ttompatz wrote:

So how does pro hedonism = pro prostitution?


Hedonism is the ethical theory that pleasure is intrinsically good. More specifically, the type of hedonism to which I was referring -- the type you yourself referenced and said you would vote for -- insists that pleasurable sensations are intrinsically good. If you are pro-hedonism, then you are pro-pleasurable sensations. Prostitution ostensibly provides pleasurable sensations. Thus, if you are for the hedonism which I attacked (and you said you were), then you are automatically pro-prostitution barring any ethical or legal objections to prostitution. You emphatically insist both that prostitution ought to be legal, and that prostitution is not unethical. Thus, you are pro-prostitution: you support it politically, you insist it is not unethical, and you insist that pleasurable sensations are intrinsically good by supporting the variant of hedonism which I condemned.

This isn't complex, and worming your way out of the implications of your own poorly thought-out words in an intellectually-honest fashion is impossible. You have declared yourself to be pro-prostitution. Ironically, the very fact that you balk at being labeled such proves my own point: regardless of whatever bullshit you spout, the ethical component of your character perceives the true character of prostitution and does not wish to be associated with it. So now you're stuck simultaneously insisting you aren't in favor of prostitution while having committed yourself to arguing in favor of it.

ttompatz wrote:
More a case of anti-government ...


How many times do I have to point out the irrelevancy of your political position on the matter before you'll stop padding your otherwise insubstantial posts with talk of the government positions which you support or oppose? Five times? Ten?

ttompatz wrote:
Where is anything said about America or Americans ...


No point in being obtuse, we both know that was a comment about how you generally comport yourself.

ttompatz wrote:
Where is anything said about America or Americans (other than
a reference to a SPECIFIC general who made it his personal affair (after some bad press back in the States about men in his command - simple statement of fact that directly related to the circumstances of the change in law) and used his position of authority in Korea to bully the then Korean government to make a change)?


Here's one example from this thread:

ttompatz wrote:
Why does it seem like only the Americans and radical Islamist countries (death for prostitution anyone?) care?


Casual grouping and implicit likening of Americans and radical Islamic countries. Flattery? Obviously not. Valid question? Impossible given there are countries which are neither American nor Islamic which outlaw prostitution. Anti-Americanism? Only remaining possibility. Prediction: you'll claim "Americans" was referring only to the American general you admitted to mentioning in the thread. Preemptive rebuttal: "Americans" is plural, and more importantly, generic in character, so I'll ask in advance that you just spare me the hypocrisy.

Or how about your suggestion, "Time to put up the fences and keep the Americans out until they become civilized people." That's not anti-American? I'm not even against you on the gun issue, but that doesn't make your posts on the matter less blatantly and obviously anti-American. Here's another quote from the same thread: "AMERICANS = Bunch of uncivilized, brutish bullies who have no place in the modern, civilized world." Not the American government, not the American military, Americans. And another: "The USA is one seriously messed up country with its priorities all skewed up and their heads screwed on backwards. Time for a modicum of common sense from the grassroots to the White House." And that's just one particular other thread.

ttompatz wrote:
And for the record... I am NOT anti-American.


Lying to me or lying to yourself. I don't care which.

ttompatz wrote:
Why do Americans (like yourself) take it personally when people of other nations are offended by the irresponsible, ill conceived and often illegal actions of the US government abroad?


I don't take it personally at all, I harshly criticize the American government myself. You don't just attack the American government, though, you attack Americans. Even that's fine with me: I was pointing out your hypocrisy, not complaining about your anti-Americanism in itself. I don't care what you think of America, I just think it's worth pointing out that you'd fit in perfectly in the culture you're so fond of bashing.

This is starting to drag on: you say you're anti-stupidity but you seem awfully eager to keep posting blatantly stupid things directed at me. When will this end? How about now?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
edwardcatflap



Joined: 22 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Thu May 30, 2013 10:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
Yes, there does seem to be some muddling of the waters in this debate.

Perhaps their morale is running low?


Hilarious. Are you the kind of guy who laughs at spell checker suggestions too?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
maximmm



Joined: 01 Feb 2008

PostPosted: Thu May 30, 2013 10:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

asylum seeker wrote:


In countries where prostitution is decriminalized as it is in NZ, Australia, Canada, UK and several other countries there is clear distinction in the law between paid consensual sex between adults and trafficking or underage prostitution. If you think that legalizing one means legalizing the other you are truly and utterly ignorant. The two issues are completely separate and there is no need to conflate them. By making prostitution legal you are not condoning any other illegal acts and it's a pure sophistry to claim otherwise.


I had no idea prostitution was legal in Canada.

The Criminal Code of Canada makes the following unlawful:[9]

owning, managing, leasing, occupying, or being found in a bawdy house, as defined in Section 197 (Section 210) declared invalid by the Ontario Court of Appeal, March 2012[10]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ttompatz



Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Location: Kwangju, South Korea

PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2013 1:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

maximmm wrote:
I had no idea prostitution was legal in Canada.


It is only legal if done between 2 consenting adults and the communication for the purpose was not done in a public place.

Street walking is illegal as are brothels. (private clubs (advance membership required and not open to the general public at large (you can't just walk in off the street and enjoy their club's member privileges)) on the other hand ARE legal).

Revised Statutes of Canada wrote:
213. Offense in relation to prostitution

213. (1) Every person who in a public place or in any place open to public view

(a) stops or attempts to stop any motor vehicle,

(b) impedes the free flow of pedestrian or vehicular traffic or ingress to or egress from premises adjacent to that place, or

(c) stops or attempts to stop any person or in any manner communicates or attempts to communicate with any person

for the purpose of engaging in prostitution or of obtaining the sexual services of a prostitute is guilty of an offense punishable on summary conviction.

Definition of “public place”

(2) In this section, “public place” includes any place to which the public have access as of right or by invitation, express or implied, and any motor vehicle located in a public place or in any place open to public view.



Revised Statutes of Canada wrote:

787. (1) Unless otherwise provided by law, everyone who is convicted of an offence punishable on summary conviction is liable to a fine of not more than five thousand dollars or to a term of imprisonment not exceeding six months or to both.

Imprisonment in default where not otherwise specified



Last edited by ttompatz on Fri May 31, 2013 1:25 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
yesmynameisweird



Joined: 29 Jun 2012

PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2013 1:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fox wrote:
yesmynameisweird wrote:
Fox wrote:

Perceived female sexual promiscuity naturally repulses the common person. There are probably evolutionarily sound reasons behind this, but like it or not, when presented with a loose woman, something seems off to men and women alike.


Your ignorance is rank, Fox. I suggest you to get out a little more. Or at least read. Just read as much as you can. If possible go to some talks and workshops and seminars by people who think differntly from you.


The last thing I need is someone so dogmatic that they responded to my post as you did telling me I need exposure to diversity of thought. You obviously do not do your own thinking, and you obviously are not willing to consider viewpoints other than those your educators instilled in you, so what profit did you possibly think could arise from addressing me? No doubt you did not consider that at all: your post is a temper tantrum, little more.

I have been clear in my indifference to how people like you live. If you are a woman, be as loose and promiscuous as you like, and if you are a man, by all means, engage with promiscuous women if you fancy. It means nothing to me. Spare me the petty bitching though, alright?

yesmynameisweird wrote:
What is this, "The Good Life." And "living properly"?


Nothing in which you would be interested. Enjoy your hedonism.


No, I won't spare you. Spare yourself.

But you won't, will you. How interesting. You keep reading, and keep posting, and yet keep claiming this "indifference."

Ah, perhaps it is because sometimes the "last thing" we think we need is the very thing we in fact need most of all....

And who said anything about hedonism? Dichotemize much? Your thought system is so tightly constructed it verges on the insane.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Fox



Joined: 04 Mar 2009

PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2013 2:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

yesmynameisweird wrote:

No, I won't spare you. Spare yourself.


So be it. If you are too lacking in dignity to cease pestering when your conversation is unwanted, to much an animal to show even that small civility, then you shall be ignored outright. Babble all you like, but expect no attention in return, ever. Good day.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
PatrickGHBusan



Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Location: Busan (1997-2008) Canada 2008 -

PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2013 3:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ttompatz wrote:
PatrickGHBusan wrote:
ttompatz wrote:
I'll vote for hedonism...

The government has no business in the business of the bedroom.

.


True but government should intervene to protect the people who work in this industry (prostitution) through regulations and legal rights for those workers.


Yes, but you are from the Great White North (home of BC Bud, safe injection sites and decriminalized prostitution) and not the "Bible Belt" (home of the Puritans and Prohibitionists).

.


Can`t tell is that is a compliment or an insult... Laughing

I just think some of countries have legalized prostitution and I agree with that move because it helps and protects the people working in that field. Canada has not done that yet and may never do it.

Asylum seeker, last I checked, prostitution was not legal nor had it been decriminalized in Canada. I could be wrong.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ttompatz



Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Location: Kwangju, South Korea

PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2013 4:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

PatrickGHBusan wrote:

I just think some of countries have legalized prostitution and I agree with that move because it helps and protects the people working in that field. Canada has not done that yet and may never do it.

Asylum seeker, last I checked, prostitution was not legal nor had it been decriminalized in Canada. I could be wrong.


Decriminalized (there is no crime of prostitution (as an adult)) but not legalized - you can't get a business license to operate as prostitute or brothel but revenue Canada will certainly take your income tax payments on your earnings with full knowledge of your occupation and no legal consequence as a result.

.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
PatrickGHBusan



Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Location: Busan (1997-2008) Canada 2008 -

PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2013 4:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ttompatz wrote:
PatrickGHBusan wrote:

I just think some of countries have legalized prostitution and I agree with that move because it helps and protects the people working in that field. Canada has not done that yet and may never do it.

Asylum seeker, last I checked, prostitution was not legal nor had it been decriminalized in Canada. I could be wrong.


Decriminalized (there is no crime of prostitution (as an adult)) but not legalized - you can't get a business license to operate as prostitute or brothel but revenue Canada will certainly take your income tax payments on your earnings with full knowledge of your occupation and no legal consequence as a result.

.


OK I see what you mean now. Revenue Canada is good at taxing everything...even what can be considered illegal!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
maximmm



Joined: 01 Feb 2008

PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2013 6:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

ttompatz wrote:
maximmm wrote:
I had no idea prostitution was legal in Canada.


It is only legal if done between 2 consenting adults and the communication for the purpose was not done in a public place.
any motor vehicle located in a public place or in any place open to public view.]


As the wiki article points out, while communication in regards to transaction is legal, the transaction itself is illegal. Once again, the wiki article clearly depicts the oddity of the Canadian law in regards to prostitution.
In the end, While everything leading up to the act lawful, the act itself is criminalized. In other words, prostitution is illegal in Canada. Well - unless you only want to meet a prostitute and talk about it and the cost -then you are perfectly fine^^
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ttompatz



Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Location: Kwangju, South Korea

PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2013 6:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

maximmm wrote:
ttompatz wrote:
maximmm wrote:
I had no idea prostitution was legal in Canada.


It is only legal if done between 2 consenting adults and the communication for the purpose was not done in a public place.
any motor vehicle located in a public place or in any place open to public view.]


As the wiki article points out, while communication in regards to transaction is legal, the transaction itself is illegal. Once again, the wiki article clearly depicts the oddity of the Canadian law in regards to prostitution.
In the end, While everything leading up to the act lawful, the act itself is criminalized. In other words, prostitution is illegal in Canada. Well - unless you only want to meet a prostitute and talk about it and the cost -then you are perfectly fine^^


Actually, it is the other way around and I quoted the specific portion (actually the ONLY portion) http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-107.html#h-72 of the relevant law (the Revised Statutes of Canada (AKA the Canadian Criminal Code)). The ONLY law regarding prostitution between consenting adults. http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/index.html rather than a wiki page.

.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
The Cosmic Hum



Joined: 09 May 2003
Location: Sonic Space

PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2013 3:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

edwardcatflap wrote:
Quote:
Yes, there does seem to be some muddling of the waters in this debate.

Perhaps their morale is running low?


Hilarious.


Indeed.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
maximmm



Joined: 01 Feb 2008

PostPosted: Fri May 31, 2013 4:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

ttompatz wrote:

Actually, it is the other way around and I quoted the specific portion (actually the ONLY portion) http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-107.html#h-72 of the relevant law (the Revised Statutes of Canada (AKA the Canadian Criminal Code)). The ONLY law regarding prostitution between consenting adults. http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/index.html rather than a wiki page.

.


It would appear that I should have looked at the wiki sources a bit more closely.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheUrbanMyth



Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: It's not a superiority complex when you really are superior

PostPosted: Mon Jun 03, 2013 4:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The Cosmic Hum wrote:
edwardcatflap wrote:
Quote:
I approached this issue from a purely ethical dimension, not a legislative one.


Yes it's interesting that in Western countries due to the disappearance of other influences that used to say whether things were ethical or not, people now automatically assume it's the role of legislation. The phrase 'There's no law against it' nowadays immediately means something is ethically OK to do. I don't recall anyone on here advocating making prostitution illegal but many are assuming people arguing against prostitution on morale grounds are doing just that.


Yes, there does seem to be some muddling of the waters in this debate.

Perhaps their morale is running low? Wink





Laughing +1


Beat me to it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
catman



Joined: 18 Jul 2004

PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2013 3:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Nevada!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Off-Topic Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 13, 14, 15  Next
Page 14 of 15

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2013 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International