>>2525053I've met (Solo) prostitutes and sex workers who did not rely on pimps to 'protect' them.
But you're again focused on the sex, and not answering what makes 'sex' uniquely different from other forms of selling one's body.
And whilst much of prostitution is tied into patriarchy, both in what causes women to be forced into it, and why men pursue it. (For example in Kaneko Fumiko's cage she ended in that situation in part because children born out of wedlock couldn't be properly registered) But there's also male prostitution. And men pursuing prostitutes out of loneliness or social isolation. It's not exclusively down to a desire to dominate the prostitute.
Many places in the world also continue to have child labor even though it's illegal. And in some where it is legal under specific circumstances, not every child engages in it. For primarily economic reasons. It's something very few children pursue unless their parents or circumstances force them into it.
I've also not ignored the arguments raised, but I've raised additional ones. Women the world over are also forced into other types of jobs in order to support themselves, their children or their (deadbeat) husbands/boyfriends. I've also repeatedly raised the question, why should 'sex' remain sacred, compared to all the other forms of previously domestic labor?
You argue it's uniquely harmful, again compared to what? Is being a high end escort as dangerous as working in construction? Logging? In sanitation or a steel mill? Not every prostitute dies in their line of work. I raised Denmark before where I can't even find the last time a prostitute has been killed.
So if this model can be adopted, proves effective, why would you continue to oppose it? And if you're gonna argue it should still be banned and prosecuted regardless (as opposed to simply becoming obsolete and irrelevant) then why raise the safety argument?