Yeah, I think you summed up the argument pretty well: "I don't like it" vs "This would help solve crimes".

I agree that it's been a healthy and robust debate here so far. As much doesn't change the fact that being alone on one side of the argument poses more work than being in the majority does. It's still more exhausting. It's all good though. I'm just saying.

Anyway, speaking of ideals, an ideal world in my mind is one without money or rape and in which, therefore, phenomenon like prostitution would be impossible.

You asked what legislative changes I'd propose around pornography. Actually a straight-up ban on it would be the ideal in my mind, though at this point I'm willing to settle for really any regulation of it at all, like requiring age verification, outlawing rape porn in particular, or anything like that. We're starting from a place of more or less completely unregulated proliferation, so just about anything would be an acceptable improvement over the status quo for my taste right now.

Regarding prostitution

Okay well history also shows that it's rather impossible to completely stamp out murder in any society of scale too, so I then guess legalizing it, thereby making it as common as possible, is the most sensible course, right? Or hey, if you ban assault weapons, you'll just relegate their sale to the criminal underground and they won't become any less common, just like the NRA says...right?

Around the turn of the century, a number of Western countries embarked on divergent experiments of how to reform prostitution policy. Some introduced what subsequently has become known as the "Nordic model" and criminalized the buying of sex, while others introduced full legalization of brothels, pimping, all of it. Today, the Nordic model -- which criminalizes sex-buying, pimping, and brothel ownership (but doesn't penalize prostitutes themselves, as it views prostituted women as the victims of an exploitative industry) -- continues to be embraced by more countries all the time, while full legalization, by contrast, hasn't had any new takers in over a decade. You know why that is? Because criminalizing johns works and legalizing everything makes the trafficking of women and children more common.

After Germany introduced full legalization of prostitution in 2003, for example, they saw a 70% increase in sex trafficking within the decade. Today, Germany's "brothel king", Jurgon Rudloff, is currently serving a five year prison sentence for similarly trafficking sex slaves in from abroad to service the heightened demand for prostitute services that resulted from legalization. In the Netherlands, most of the legal brothels have now been closed because they've been caught trafficking sex slaves in (which isn't legal) and the same is true of those famous communities in Nevada where prostitution has been formally legalized here in the U.S. Amsterdam's new mayor, Femke Halsema of GroenLinks (a left-leaning environmentalist party similar to the Green Party here in the U.S.), who is also the city's first female mayor, will be banning tours of the city's (in)famous red light district starting next year in a policy move supported by 80% of the city's prostitutes and is actively weighing other major changes such as banning prostitute windows. The city has been overrun by wealthy, foreign partiers, who now outnumber actual citizens on any given day of the year, as a result largely of legalizing brothels. That's how well it's going. One senses a definite policy direction here away from limitless permissiveness and toward cracking down. I could go on, but it's really the same story everywhere.

Liberals and progressives like to make the claim that full legalization of prostitution benefits the women employed in said field. When I point out that the actual result of that policy everywhere has been major increases in enslavement, not unionization (as they assure us), I find that they don't have much to say. It's as if they've just been choosing to buy into the talking points of a kazillion-dollar global industry, most often for self-interested reasons...

Prostitution is a major problem in my community (and I don't just mean among younger women) for two basic reasons: 1) because drugs are a major problem in my community, and 2) because, resulting in no small part from the former, sexual abuse is also not uncommon. Most of the prostituted women here had experienced both drug addiction and sexual abuse at the hands of a loved one before entering the field, and both of those things really seem to play a role. Pimps often pay women in drugs, for example, to keep them trapped in the business and rape is something that I can attest to from first-hand experience tends to tell you a lot about what you're worth to the world. Personal liberty is not an appreciable factor in the equation, in my observation. Most of them hate working as prostitutes, and indeed many investigations have born out that prostitutes tend to survive by dissociating themselves from their situation in the moment (as in pretending that they're somewhere else, doing something else), which I think tells you just how much "fun" they're actually having. Making a pattern of dissociation sometimes even leads to the wholesale loss of one's sense of identity, to where they no longer remember things like who they are, where they are, etc.

It ought to tell you something that a recent survey of American high school students found that most wouldn't have sex with someone they didn't want to for less than $2 million, while the average prostitute does so for less than $200. What does that tell you about the level of self-worth that's involved?

The goal here should be to minimize the commonality of prostitution, not to normalize what is, matter-of-factly, rape in all but semantics. That's what the Nordic model, as it has become known, does. And that's why it's the approach that's supported by the Coalition Against Trafficking in Women.

Well on the topic of anal sex; women can and do achieve orgasm from consensual anal sex. The caveat is that the person doing the penetration needs to know how to perform it properly (sadly most straight cis men don't) and the receiver needs to be knowledgeable enough about their own body to know if it's right for them. Some people just can't do anal due to personal or medical reasons. Men and Women both weren't "designed" to have anal sex, we've just come to figure out that it is another way of having a fulfilling orgasm for both sexes. Anal sex does hurt but it hurts for anybody, especially if it's your first time, it's just the way the anus works but proper knowledge and execution minimizes discomfort/pain and it's perfectly safe to perform. It seems you have some misconceptions of anal sex, it's just one of numerous ways different individuals derive pleasure.

Being an inter-sectional feminist I do agree with most, if not all, of your views but your conclusion to outright ban and outlaw these practices and criminalize these individuals is where you lose me and it's one of the reasons I don't subscribe to your brand of feminism. There are A LOT of wrongs with these practices/industries, some of which you have so eloquently explained, but the fact of the matter is that if we made these things illegal, it will only hurt the women involved. Really, the only way forward that I can see is to legalize and regulate it so we can give the care these women deserve so they have a better standard of living.

I would like to know what you think is the best way to achieve the outlawing of these industries and practices and what should be done with the displaced women that were involved? I'm genuinely curious.

The main effect of legalizing the prostitution of women is and will always be to simply make it more common, not better. While we shouldn't penalize women for working in prostitution, purchasing sex from someone is not principally different from raping them. It really isn't. That's making someone have sex with you who almost certainly wouldn't otherwise, and mind you strictly on their terms at that. That simply cannot be allowed in my book.

As to what should be done with those who are displaced, robust exit support services that would offer temporary accommodation, help in applying for crisis loans or disability benefits, counseling, advocacy, and advice are required to help women successfully transition out of the sex industry and into other fields of work.

(Concerning anal sex, what I have spoken to is the rule of how it is experienced. I won't get any popularity points for pointing this out, but the simple truth of the matter is that the nature of authentic female sexual pleasure tends toward the unfashionably vanilla. And no, I'm not for outlawing anal sex or what have you. I pointed out a connection it's growing commonality and the proliferation of online pornography as part of my larger argument against pornography as an institution and proposed that online pornography should be blocked.)

"purchasing sex from someone is not principally different from raping them."

One involves getting permission, the other doesn't.

The two are different.

Whoa!  Alarm bells are going off, mainly due to the "principally different" part.  Sure, she isn't looking to sleep with you without said money but...how often ISN'T money the equation for voluntary transactions?  Whether she turns down doing that sort of work or not, she'd still have agency (unless a trafficking victim which is something else entirely).  That's worlds apart from the repulsive violation of another's body in regards to rape.

First of all, that depends on how consensual their prostitution is.

Secondly, my point was that there is no difference in spirit. You're making someone (most likely a rape survivor who doesn't know better) have sex with you who almost certainly wouldn't otherwise, and mind you strictly on their terms at that. If the other person has to dissociate in order to weather the experience, clearly they are miserable. That's not what sex is supposed to be like.

What do you mean by "no difference in spirit"? You're not forcing someone to have sex with you just because you offer to spend money for it. In your view sex workers seem to have absolutely no agency over their decicions. You're loading your arguments with heavy emotional wight(likely a rape survivor) but are you aware that our proposal would be a major infringement on the right of self determination?

I follow you on the mental-emotional complexities; however, the base of both occupations comes back to said workers still having agency over their bodies* and deciding to agree to the transaction.  A trade of x value for y value.  A man forcing himself onto another man/woman without their consent is absolutely vile and doesn't share this key aspect with prostitution.   

*(to emphasize again: this is disregarding the uglier stories of sex trafficking to focus on the principle of this argument)