Reference no: EM133302252

Critical Analysis for "When Prostitution is Nobody's Business"

Critical Summary

Introduction

Everyone is entitled to privacy from the outside world within the scope of their rights during sex. Laurie Shrage argues in the article "When Prostitution Is Nobody's Business" and provides several arguments in favor of this claim. This essay will analyze and outline justifications for her position. In the end, the argument is persuasive, and this text will explain and support that opinion.

The author's "Big Picture" is that women who have several intimate partners for financial purposes ought to seek seclusion so they can engage in these activities in their homes' comfort without external interference. She starts by discussing the informational, decisional, and physical privacies, including the entitlement to access them during sexual procedures in seclusion to further support her stance. For one, physical privacy involves enclosed spaces where one feels safe conducting particular actions without being observed by the undesired, regardless of the number of sexual partners. Informational and decisional privacy is the sole confidentiality of ideas and values of an individual before or during a specific activity.

The author brings out the main idea "We typically perceive the presence of privacy during an exchange of cash or presents between sexual partners. However, what if someone has multiple intimate partners and frequently accepts presents or money from them all? (Shrage, 2015). It appears that respect for people's privacy exists when they have only a few sexual partners, while less respect for their privacy exists when they have several sex partners for pay and classify them as "sex workers". Even this presumption is puzzling in nature. Without experience, one cannot automatically conclude that this assumption is unfounded. It shouldn't matter whether someone has numerous partners to make money. They may be going through difficulties that prevent them from being able to physically support themselves, in which case they search for a better lifestyle.

The author exemplifies Brandy Britton, a retired university professor, and a single mother. To prevent her home from going into foreclosure, Britton invited men around for dates and received gifts from them. She was detained undercover and charged with four charges of prostitution in 2006. She committed suicide one week before her court appearance (Shrage, 2015). What can be inferred about her position as a result? Before her husband eventually caused marital disputes, Britton seemed to lead a stable life. Britton's financial situation deteriorated after she and her ex-husband split. She had to devise a plan so that she could continue to be stable on her own as the only way to make atonement. She was eventually arrested, immediately charged, and classified as a prostitute.

Why should she be treated any differently from people who have committed long-term sexual relationships? For instance, let's imagine that my next-door neighbor is a lovely middle-aged widow who barely makes ends meet by working his main job to support himself. Hence, he maintains long-term relationships with women who are regarded as "cougars," single, wealthy, and ready to trade sexual favors for cash. He spaces out these ladies in such a way that no one notices, keeping him in the safe zone and, more importantly, allowing him to live his life without worry. As a result, his case and Britton's case are comparable in that they both included supporting decisions that would be advantageous to all parties involved as well as themselves. The only issue was that she was apprehended anonymously, which wasn't how it should have happened. As a result, her privacy rights ought to have been upheld to allow her to carry on living the life she had set out to lead.

Critical Evaluation

Restricting the number of people who can access our personal information protects our right to informational privacy. People like Britton should be protected by their fundamental rights to privacy and equitable treatment under the law when they do not harm others and are not a nuisance to the public (Shrage, 2015). Engagement in these types of sexual behavior, we ultimately want anyone other than our sexual partners to remain in the dark about our identities and any other facts. However, there are times when information can slip out and end up in the wrong hands, which shouldn't happen. Therefore, making it a legitimate business where owning the right to personal information would be one method to stop the information from leaking. Since one possesses the legal authority to information protection, law enforcement won't need to intervene.

Some individuals routinely engage in indecent behavior that exposes and cause a commotion in public. Instead of arresting the people who behave appropriately, keep to themselves, and keep to private areas, it should be those people who should be policed and detained. Consequently, both official and informal prostitution ought to be legalized and strictly controlled. Meaning as long as the person isn't wrongfully violating and abusing their right to privacy, they won't be subject to enforcement (Shrage, 2015) Women frequently lack the freedom to choose whether something is convenient for them or not to construct their businesses while engaging in various sexual relationships.

Some legislation, such as the British Model, battled injustices against prostitutes. The illicit prostitute market has been targeted by other laws and regulations. According to the author, "This is a different paradigm from the Swedish one, which criminalizes providing money for sex, or the Dutch "harm reduction model," which enables and regulates institutions that perform commercial sex work. These methods have had varying degrees of success in preventing trafficking and nonconsensual sex work as well as preserving the safety and dignity of sex workers (Shrage, 2015). However, these laws are humiliating and violate people's right to privacy, and they shouldn't lose those rights because of their line of work. One can concur that the Dutch Model is only attempting to eliminate the risks that prostitutes might encounter, but it would be unethical to shut down private companies out of pure unease. Prostitutes and individuals who engage in sexual activity for compensation in private settings do it voluntarily. They are aware of the potential repercussions of their behavior if they engage in prolonged sexual activity with numerous partners.

Even if these women are aware of the consequences of their acts, they will still want to have some kind of defense against dubious clients. Therefore, legalizing prostitution would give those who need aid over a long period. Therefore, the implications that prostitution should be legalized, these people should have the right to privacy when having sex with different people for money (Shrage, 2015). This circumstance shouldn't be handled any differently than individuals who have a right to privacy with a single or a small number of sex partners over a certain time.

Physical privacy is the primary topic of discussion in Shrage's article. The significance of informational privacy and its importance is also addressed. Understanding that the enclosed information is delicate and requires that we handle it as such. Concerning the Brandy Britton case, she was merely attempting to act in her own best interests, but over time she was made public and suffered as a result. If the wrong people were not involved, she could have kept repaying her bills. Although we cannot yet declare prostitution to be acceptable or bad, we must recognize the importance of privacy and urge both local police officers and regular individuals to do the same.