Talk:Prostitution in New Zealand

New Zealand B‑class Mid‑importance

	New Zealand portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	An editor has requested that an image or photograph be added to this article.

Sexology and sexuality: Sex work B‑class

	Human sexuality portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sexology and sexuality, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of human sexuality on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Sexology and sexualityWikipedia:WikiProject Sexology and sexualityTemplate:WikiProject Sexology and sexualitySexology and sexuality articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Sex work task force.

Comments without header

I removed the following template, as it produced nothing but redlinks: { { Oceania in topic|Prostitution in } } --Xyzzyplugh 18:50, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

changed 18 to 17 as 18 year olds are allowed to be sex workers

added latest report --Rbaal 03:47, 14 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the bit about UK law as it was incorrect, the act of prostitution has never been illegal in NZ.

tidied up a couple of other places no major changes

--Rbaal 08:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It hasn't? My understanding was that in 1840 or thereabouts the laws of Britain became the laws of NZ. Was prostitution not illegal in Britain? Could you put it some kind of history summary? --Helenalex 14:01, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not certain about the status/history of prostitution in the UK. Currently it is not illegal, running a brothel, soliciting, living of third party etc are illegal. I cannot find a good source that gives its status in 1840. I suspect it was not actually illegal and might never have been generally so (though there might have been local laws etc.). Therefore if NZ copied UK that might be why it has never been illegal here.

That is why there were 70 "brothels" in Auckland according to a survey just before 2003. The way they operated from a legal point of view was that you actually entered into two contracts, one with the massage parlour the other with the sex worker. You did this by paying at the front desk for the "massage" ($60-$80) then in the room you paid the sex worker ($80-$100). The parlour owner kept the $80 for their cut and she kept the $100 for her "tip". Hence everything was legal as there were two contracts but only one was for sex and as it was person-to-person it was legal.

I don't know when this system was first used but it was certainly present in the 1950's though I do not know what the fees were then.

--Rbaal 01:18, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above statement is only partially correct. The old Massage Parlours Act ( repealed by the new PRA ) actually made all acts of prostitution occurring within a massage parlour an offense under the Act. Thus the attempts by parlours and masseuses to separate the transaction into parts did not actually change the illegality, but simply made it difficult for the police to prove a case as an officer would have to go into the room with the masseuse. This makes the main article also somewhat incorrect as prostitution itself was illegal if it occurred within a massage parlour. Confused ? That's why the move to reform. Under the old system massage parlours were licensed but had to play a dance with the police over not being brothels, while additionally the workers were not allowed to be masseuses if they had drug convictions, which forced such people onto the streets and into unsafe environments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.86.103 (talk) 13:58, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon Copeland and Sweden

(moved from article) - note left in relation to Copeland's press release - Note: the figures named in the article are not the same as found in Sweden (this editor is from Sweden). Police reports about 130 street prostitutes in Stockholm. Other sources estimates an additional 600-800 over the internet, in houses etc. The law is questioned in Sweden. To note is that there is very little debate nor research done in Sweden regarding prostitution. A report from the government from year 2004 can be found at: http://www.socialstyrelsen.se/Publicerat/2004/8449/Summary.htm. Never reports from 2007 also exists. Prostitution is about the same before and after the law, maybe slightly higher. The difference is mainly that it has moved from the streets to other places where it is more difficult for government to track it. The intention from the government is however that the law shall be further more strict. Mgoodyear (talk) 07:33, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Flags on 'by Country' articles

I reversed the removal of the flag, because I think that it helps unite the various New Zealand topics. It's not irrelevant, just to prostitution, not to New Zealand, where this is a very important topic 142.239.254.19 (talk) 15:38, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The {{New Zealand topics}} template at the bottom of the article serves the purpose of uniting New Zealand topics that you describe. The flag is an image entirely unrelated to prostitution. I'm not sure what would be a suitable illustration. I took a look at my book of old New Zealand cartoons (The Unauthorised Version) in the hope of finding one about prostitution which was out of copyright, but didn't see anything. There's a photo on Flickr under a suitable licence depicting an advertisement for prostitutes, but to reproduce that here is to support the particular club which is presumably still in business. We could also take a photo on a suitable street corner of street-walkers, taking care not to show faces. Perhaps the best approach would be to contact the New Zealand Prostitutes' Collective and ask them to supply a suitable photo under a free license, such as CC-BY.-gadfium 18:41, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone could set up the kind of cheesy pic they sometimes use to illustrate newspaper articles on the story - like a woman in lingerie (no face shown) counting money or something. There might be a generic one on Commons but it would be likely to show foreign currency or driving on the right side of the street or something. --Helenalex (talk) 21:01, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Needs significant re-writing

This article needs significant re-writing. It has very poor sentence structures and grammar. JohnC (talk) 00:03, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I agree and the article does not cover the law that was repealed by the new Act, namely the Massage Parlours Act ( MPA ). The MPA was introduced in the 1970's and it provided the legislative and regulatory framework for the sex industry prior to the introduction of the PRA. The article also appears to have a left wing bias. The PRA was only passed as a result of National party member support, notably leader Don Brash and high profile members such a Maurice Williamson making valuable speeches in the House. The article mentions support for the Bill from women's rights groups but opposition from only ' some ' feminists while the police were neutral. In fact the feminists were divided down the middle. The radical feminists, along with the gay community and prostitutes supported the Bill, while the traditional feminists, police and church groups opposed the Bill. The feminists debate was quite heated. The radical feminists supported the Bill as they saw prostitutes as the high priestesses of the matriarchal society who had been persecuted by the patriarchal society. The traditional feminists, many of them Marxist, saw prostitutes as victims of the patriarchal society and an example of the objectification and exploitation of women. The article needs a complete rethink. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.237.86.103 (talk) 14:24, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Radical feminists are opposed to prostitution

Radical feminists do not support prostitution and its legalization. Liberal feminsts do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.121.9.90 (talk) 13:40, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The radical feminists are the ones who see prostitutes as victims of the patriarchal society and an example of the objectification and exploitation of women. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.121.9.90 (talk) 13:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And radical feminists are not "traditional", they oppose everything which is traditional.

Radical feminists call for a reordering of society, they oppose standard gender roles, and they aim to end the oppression of women and the male domminance from society by attacking the underlying causes of these problems and by addressing the fundamental societal components that support them.

Radical feminists see prostitution as an integral part of the patriarchal system, as a way of maintaining patriarchy.

Radical feminists are not the ones who suport prostitution; it's the sex positive feminists who support it.

Sex positive feminists believe that women can have positive experiences working as prostitutes, and that prostitution isn't necessarily bad for women if prostitutes are treated with respect.

There have been objections to the term "sex-positive feminism", as this implies that feminists who oppose prostitution are "sex-negative".

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.121.9.90 (talk) 14:02, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]