SALEM STATE UNIVERSITY

Ethical Analysis of Prostitution

Is it moral or immoral?
Haley McNary-Loiacono 5/10/2012

Page |1

Haley McNary-Loiacono Dr. Mulnix Ethics 05/10/2012 The Morality in Prostitution Prostitution is often referred to as the oldest profession known to man. It is, by definition, the occupation or practice of engaging in sexual relations for an exchange of money or other valuable goods. There are many arguments that exist trying to prove the immorality of this act, but is it in fact immoral? Though a cross examination of ethical theories and taking into account the strongest of arguments, I intend to prove that the practice of prostitution is, in fact, not immoral at all. In fact, it may be safe to say that the practice of any type of sexual act could be considered a type of exchange, and therefore would theoretically be just as immoral. Through both Utilitarian and Kantian lenses I will examine the morality of prostitution, which will lead me to a series of rebuttals and hypothetical scenarios. The weight of this dilemma has been felt since the middle ages, and today this major theory will be laid to rest. Through the view of a Utilitarian, the conclusion will be undoubtedly moral. However through a Kantian perspective, there are multiple arguments; however none of them prove the actual morality or immorality of prostitution.

Page |2

SECTION I: Utilitarianism At first glance, an amateur may argue that the utilitarian party is so simplistic that they may be as immature to state that since prostitution brings happiness to a number of people, it is obviously moral. However, that is far too broad for my taste. In fact, it is true that in the United States, most regions have made this practice illegal, and breaking the law does not serve general utility. Utilitarianism, by definition, is the notion that the right or moral actions are those which benefit or maximize the pleasure of a majority1. If something serves utility it is indicative of that action causing the maximum happiness for the most people. Mill argues in favor of prostitution in saying that it is just like any other line of work, a series of body motions, and a receiving of a paycheck2. It has long been the argument of feminists that a woman would not freely choose to be a prostitute; in fact she is almost enslaved to the practice as a survival measure. Mill responds to this by saying if we assume this to be true, almost every occupation could be given the same type of category2. Most people do not choose occupations based solely upon what they enjoy doing, but rather what they are capable of achieving for the largest sum of money. Here, Mill is saying that the only reason that we chose a job at all is because we need it for economic prosperity. A child may dream of becoming a celebrity game show host (outrageous I know) but this same child may grow up to be a stockbroker, because his reality forced him to choose a profession in accordance to economic needs. So is this man too enslaved to the practice of stockbroking? No because he made a choice to pursue a career that would help him advance economically. Being enslaved means that you do not have the freedom or the choice to leave your job, however prostitutes are able to. If people were not forced to work at jobs for a survival measure, then there would be no menial employees, like myself.

Page |3

Utilitarians also argue that the general wellbeing of the population may be against prostitution as an employment outlet because it may lead to the outbreak of a Sexually Transmitted Disease. This is a possible outcome; however in 11 counties of Nevada, prostitution is legal and taxable. This comes with of course certain restrictions, there is usually a set fee for the brothel, they earn a normal paycheck with tax deductions, and they must go for routine Sexually Transmitted Disease scans and tests if they want to continue as part of the brothel. This is an intelligent way to encompass the occupation of prostitution as well as make it taxable, which the government loves to do. The mandatory STD tests would cap the spread and outbreak, and the use of protection would of course be encouraged. An objection that has lit a wildfire throughout the prostitution debate is the question of whether or not this act is harming modern day society. Though the media plays it fast and loose with sex scandals and teenage pregnancy, it is not immoral for the body to engage in sexual activities. In fact, it is one of the only things that the human body is preprogramed to do, and it creates a pleasurable sensation for all parties involved. A hedonist objection to the prude party promoting chastity may be that sex provides the maximum amount of pleasure; it is almost a duty to seek this pleasure out. Though I am not a hedonist I answer the question in a similar way. What two or maybe three people do in the bedroom is strictly a matter between those people, and it is business that is none of ours. If a man chooses to lock himself in a bedroom and drink 3 bottles of whiskey because he is depressed from the death of his wife, it is not a concern of ours since he is not interfering with any life other than his own. He is actually enjoying forgetting his worries and troubles. This is not an actwhich is tarnishing the lives of the masses, it is an act to help this man get through his own life. The same goes for prostitution, it is a job in order to secure a life of

Page |4

stability, which results in the pleasuring of all involved. Now of course the pleasure of a prostitute during intercourse is debatable. The pleasure may not be just a physical sensation, it is also that she is getting paid which will lead her to be able to provide herself with a life that will hopefully bring her some joy. There of course is pleasure in being able to economically survive, which is a result of this type of job. It seems to be clear that the issue with prostitution is more or less the question of whether or not sex is immoral. SECTION II: Kantianism Moving on to a Kantian view of prostitution, which in itself is far more interesting and debatable. A Kantian of course rates moral rightness according to the categorical imperative. Thus Kant himself believes that it is our duty to abstain from sexual intercourse until you are married. This is an issue that I will address later, thus I will keep moving through what is a series of weakly threaded arguments from the Kantian party. Perhaps, the Kantian party could object to prostitution based upon the Principle of Humanity; which states that you must never degrade a human to such a level that you use them as merely a means to a certain end3. In this situation the prostitute is using a client for cash, and the client is using the prostitute for sexual gratification. This is however a debatable objection because to a certain extent we always use people to get what we need. For example you use your boss in order to get a paycheck, you use a spouse as to not be lonely and share your life with love. It is here that the method of using someone can be challenged. Perhaps a stricter Kantian would believe support my prior rebuttal however he would add that the person being used will reap no benefits, and is strictly a tool to commute between points A and B. In this case the proper response to the counterargument would be that since a prostitute is using the person and in return

Page |5

giving them pleasure, then it is in fact, not a violation of the principle of humanity. No matter what we do in life, we are using someone in a way that could potentially violate the principle of humanity. However there is a line, if you are to use someone as a means to achieve a goal, then you must give something back to them. If I buy a candy bar at a store, I am simply using the clerk as a way to get my candy bar. In turn I give him the money, which funds the company, which in turns writes his paychecks. The same goes for prostitution, the client has sex with a prostitute, the client pays the prostitute for received pleasure, and then she pays her bills. It is not a violation because it is a trade that occurs between two consenting individuals for mutual benifit. Kant may use the counterargument that you are in fact setting aside the persons emotions and again using them as a vehicle for your own benefit3. In other words, a woman will let a man have sex with her for the money, so is it in fact rape? Kant believes it is based on the simple notion that because the way the woman has let her body get degraded so many times, she is now immoral. However this argument has been shot down by most of the other ethical parties by one simple clause, the definition of rape. Rape is the forcible act of sexual intercourse against the persons free will4. So using the definition of rape, we will slowly walk through a possible rejection of Kant. First, was this woman or man forced into sex? No, in fact she arrived at her place of work today with the full intention of having sexual intercourse with numerous clients. Of course just because she had the intention of having sex does not mean she was not taken advantage of, however she did seek out these men by her own approval or the approval of a superior. Was the act against her free will? The prostitute in most cases would have been sober, of age, and had chosen this path to life for the monetary gain. In fact, I am willing to bet that if you asked the

Page |6

prostitute, she would agree that she consented. This is where Kants argument falls apart. If both parties are consenting, then there should be no issue present, and if there was any doubt perhaps a contract could be devised. In each session the prostitute and the client could both sign to validate their consent, though there would be an extreme loss of privacy. Kantians swing and miss in my opinion when it comes to their views on prostitution. There is also the Kantian view of autonomy. Autonomy is free will that is not determined by anything else, a choice that is made which reflects no other circumstances. I will skip to the core of the matter? Is prostitution autonomous? The answer is absolutely not, in fact, there is no decision in life that is made without the basis of something else. You do not just wake up and say I want to have a minimum wage job, you have to seek one out in order to survive in todays society which demands income. Again, a person may wake up and say I want to have intercourse, but no one would say in unbiased circumstances, I would like to have sex for income. This is because the demand of needing an income drives this decision. Unfortunately there is no place in this present world where the definition of autonomy is actually something that can be true. SECTION III: Ethical Dilemmas There exists a world of counterarguments against the morality of prostitution which stretches far beyond the constraints of Utilitarianism and Kantianism. In fact, it is within this realm that we progress towards the more griping arguments. I believe that the major objections to this trade stem from other concerns rather than the actual trade of prostitution. One of these major arguments is whether or not this type of promiscuous behavior is immoral. This is the meat of the argument, and it is, as I believe, somewhat unanswerable. In this one area it is almost impossible for critics to distance themselves from religion, which is not the foundation of ethics. Sexuality is not immoral and I intend to prove why.

Page |7

Outside world religion disputes, it is virtually impossible to find anything on the internet in regards to the morality of sex. Perhaps this is because consensual sex between two individuals does not need to be backed by marital vows. In fact, it may be argued that sex is a natural instinct, thus it is not even up for moral debate. This would be as if we called into question the morality of urinating. Is it immoral to hold your urine if you really need to go? How ridiculous of an argument that would be, making an individual conform to these restrictions that limit natural callings. No one would judge the morality of an individuals bathroom usage, so why is it so easy for sexuality to be judged? Of course there are limits imposed to regulate natural occurrences. For example it would be impolite to urinate on your best friend, or out in a crowd of people. Because of this bathrooms were made in order to facilitate this natural occurrence. In the same respect, households, bedrooms, and hotels are considered proper outlets for the natural action of sex. In the wild, tigers may copulate in public, but in human society it is not appropriate. It is still natural however it is just a bit more regulated. There is of course the factor that we are rational beings, and that it is degrading to our bodies to engage in sexual intercourse before marriage. In fact 95% of Americans have premarital sex, so how can something so common be so forbidden5? How is it degrading to take part in a natural occurrence if both or all parties are willing? It is not tarnished with illegal acts, and it is not a bodily harming action. Though there is always a risk of pregnancy, Sexually Transmitted Diseases, and other emotional repercussions, the likely outcome is that nothing will happen if responsible choices are made. In fact sex does more good than harm, thus it yields a potentially good outcome. According to consequentialism that outcome is enough. Aside from the morality of sex, there exists another argument that is fortifying for the anti-prostitution party. Would the legalization of prostitution create a general stigma for sex?

Page |8

Would everyone then be willing to have sex in exchange for other goods and services? This is a question that raises the validity of the principle of universibility; act only so that the maxim could be considered a law. This was a point that I brought up briefly before, however again this principle haunts moral arguments. If prostitution was a law, then of course the world would be crazy, perhaps a happier place one might argue, but nevertheless a bit crazed. But what if the principle was: work hard to earn a living and provide the best lifestyle as possible, without harming others. Well this would generate great work ethic, in which the world would become a much better place, and people would have much dignity. Prostitution is certainly one option however there exists a world of other opportunities to become lucrative and have a positive influence on the world. So in reality, if this was the principle, it would yield amazing results. In the sex industry it goes without saying that many minors take part in this lifestyle. It is a common concern that the legalization of prostitution would encourage minors to sell their bodies for cash, drugs, and other miscellaneous items. Of course this is a possible outcome, but the wonderful thing about prostitution being legal is that it could be regulated. An age restriction would of course be placed on this profession due to legal implications and other damaging results. Perhaps it would even be required that prostitutes looking to gain employment with a brothel would be required to complete a certificate program. Here they would study anatomy, health, business, and other areas to become educated in their line of work. With legality and education, the world of prostitution would become far more safe, regulated, and of course taxable. One of the major arguments for prostitution is that it would be taxable, as it is in Nevada. Anything that is taxable seems to be a crowd pleaser especially with a government that is up to its neck in debt. The fact that it can be taxed of course does not make it right, in fact there are

Page |9

some dangerous products on the market which are still taxable. Cigarettes, alcohol, and even fireworks all have a special tax on them to apparently make the public aware to the fact that they can be harmful or lethal. Prostitution on the other hand would require no such tax. In fact, it is probably safer to sleep with a prostitute regularly than it is to smoke or drink. This is not an argument based upon the clasp of safety tax, however it is constructed to exemplify one of the major benefits. Instead of allowing more and more Americans to collect an unemployment check, prostitution would actually make money for the government, thus another positive! An opposition that I have come across repeatedly is the fear that a capitalization of prostitution may cause an increase in the sex slave industry. This is of course a very serious and legitimate fear. However there may be a few feasible solutions. One is that if there were organized brothels, investors could own a share of the business, and probably make a lot of money. Another idea is that if it was acceptable, then it would create jobs such as escorts, room service, hostesses, etc. It would become a million dollar industry overnight, creating employment for many. The last notion I have would be for other investors and average Joes to be able to buy stock in a certain brothel, which would of course be an easy way to potentially make money. With all of these solutions in place, it is easy to see that it is no longer a moral argument, however more of a business proposition. A form of human trafficking that we often ignore is when a group of prositutes are basically owned by a pimp. The pimp will tell her when, where, and who she must have sex with. He will most likely get her addicted to drugs, and use drugs to pay or reward his girls. This is also a huge issue. The legalization of prostitution will help create a legal way to make money off of prostitutes, which will in turn reduce the illegal actions. At this point laws could be formed to protect the integrity and business of a prostitute and harsher punishments could be brought about

P a g e | 10

for pimps and those who are involved in human trafficking. It is not a solution, but it is a suggestion that will help. It will not abolish human trafficking, however it will help regulate it and punish those who abuse these prostitutes. The last opposition I will discuss is the suggestion that prostitution would raise the idea that the human body can be bought and sold. This would destroy the integrity of an individual, treating them like stock or animals. Many people would be inclined to believe that this would destroy everything that we fought to abolish during the civil war. It is, at first glance, valid argument, however it is unfortunately something that already occurs. You can sell sperm, which is a body part and also equally degrading, in the same respect you can also sell your eggs. Strippers will undress and expose their bodies for cash, and you can pay for your body to be modified in many ways with plastic surgery. It is even possible to pay someone to carry your fetus as a surrogate; you can purchase blood, participate in medical trials, sell hair, and sell your plasma. All of these things involve selling and buying parts of the body, which is perhaps immoral in itself one may say. However it is an action that is carried out willingly and with full knowledge and consent of the party. I do not believe that making money in these ways is immoral, so why would prostitution be? SECTION IV: Final Evaluation In conclusion the very basis of prostitution was tested, criticized and broken apart. Utilitarians proved that there is utility in sex and working, and to outlaw prostitution is to outlaw all work professions. If you deem a job reasonable because it is a trade-off for money, then you must approve of prostitution. It is chosen with free will and good intentions, much like other professions. Kantianism did not provide a substantial ground to stand on other than of course the

P a g e | 11

argument based upon the principle of humanity. This of course did not provide substantial evidence to suggest that prostitution is different than any other type of relationship or employment. After critical analysis is it evident that the issues with prostitution all boil down to the basic question of whether or not sex is moral. This argument was one that was difficult to rebuttal because of the lack of nonreligious input. Outlining the natural inclination of sex and the benefits of them I made my argument, which I believe cannot be disputed. The stigma that could be brought to sex is certainly a concern, however the principle of utility helped demonstrate why it would not. Lastly the legalization issues were brought into light, and I demonstrated some of the major arguments for prostitution, and why it would be wise and fruitful for our country to establish a business out of this act, if after all it is going to take place regardless of the law. An age limit and perhaps a certificate program would bring much needed dignity to the trade, which would then aid these workers in being respectable employees. Prostitution is the oldest profession known to man, and perhaps one of the most objected to. However the morality of prostitution is almost non-debatable as is the morality of sex itself. The legalization and moral acceptance of prostitution would open up many doors into the realm of business. Lastly it would provide a much safer and more secure place to take part in this occupation, which will be highly beneficial.

P a g e | 12

Works Cited 1. Luca, Andrei. "Introduction to Ethics." The Red Light District Introduction to Ethics. Binghamton University, 9 May 2011. Web. 17 Apr. 2012. <http://parenethical.com/phil140sp11/2011/05/09/the-red-light-district/>. 2. "Most Americans Have Had Premarital Sex." USA Today. Gannett, 19 Dec. 2008. Web. 17 Apr. 2012. <http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-12-19-premaritalsex_x.htm>. 3. Odze, Daniel. "Introduction to Ethics." Moral Judgements on Prostitution. Binghamton University, 30 Apr. 2011. Web. 17 Apr. 2012. <http://parenethical.com/phil140sp11/2011/05/08/moral-judgements-on-prostitution/>.