What is with Neoliberals and their Insane Obsession with Prostitution?
“Prostitution should not be a crime. Prostitutes are not committing an inherently harmful act. While the spread of disease and other detriments are possible in the practice of prostitution, criminalization is a sure way of exacerbating rather than addressing such effects. We saw this quite clearly in the time of alcohol prohibition in this country.
…What makes prostitution a ‘victimless crime’ in the sense that no one is necessarily harmed by it is that there are consenting adults involved.”
Sherry F. Colb, JD, Professor of Law and Judge Frederick Lacey Scholar at Rutgers Law School (2006)
It’s not surprising to see Prostitution defended as a “Victimless Crime.” Professor Colb and Judge Lacey believe it to be a “crime without a victim.” But what about children being forced into prostitution? Obviously, such a broad statement declaring “prostitution is a victimless crime” is not totally defensible. I wonder if either Colb 0r Lacey would find their opinion of prostitution change if they were forced to trade places with a street walker for a month.
There are many dimensions to the phenomenon of prostitution: psychological, sexual, religious, economics… and it seems that only one could only defend such a complicated thing without the knowledge of these dimensions.
Women endure prostitution because they need money. Men have forced women to prostitute their sexuality as a means of ensuring survival. As being dubbed, the “World’s Oldest Profession,” prostitution predates the use of money, but not survival. There is evidence that the prostitute were accorded favorably in certain eras and cultures, whether in the Court or the Temple. Rajendra Kumar Sharma relates in his book, “Social Problems And Welfare,” that India was home to a religious mode of cultural expectation in the south of the continent, which produced an expectation that a family provide one daughter to be the one of the “Devadasis,” or “slaves of God.” These young girls were “slaves” all right, as they were forced into a life of prostitution as sacred whores.  By the time India reached the medieval period, prostitutes became Courtesans in the courts of the noblemen and royalty. Mesopotamia and the Greco-Roman cultures also had their version of the practice.
Some researchers claim that prostitution only exists because of male promiscuity,  which is a simple idea easily grasped. The neoliberal will claim that there is a “free exchange” between the prostitute and the john, so there is no “crime.” but I suggest that the exchange is made unequally – for the john usually has his survival sorted out to the point where he can buy the right to have sex with a woman. The woman is in a different state altogether: she had to have sex with the john so she can eat and survive. Seems to me that there is a crime going on here that is called, “Exploitation,” which is a “right” the neoliberal gives himself through a twisted sense of morality (as we have seen in Mises, Rothbard and Rand).
In an Equal Money system, there will be no need for prostitutes at all, for a couple of reasons: men will no longer be allowed to treat women as objectified sex toys and because there will be no need to survive as all the basic requirements will be taken care of by the point of Equality, for prostitution exists only because of men’s lust and the money they created which we’re forced to use in order to buy our survival with. Economic Equality for All ensures that a TRUE “Capitalism is possible – where there is no deliberate-manufactured scarcity and people are able to fulfill the life that they can be equal to in all ways. The Equal Money system is the answer yet again.
 Social Problems And Welfare, by Rajendra Kumar Sharma, Atlantic. 1998
 Love for Sale: A World History of Prostitution, by Nils Johan Ringdal, Richard Daly, Grove Press. 2005