So....you're saying a large illegal prostitution setup with not regular testing, no protection for the ladies, and no guidelines is preferable/safer then a large legal prostitution setup with the above guidlines (meaning any infections will be detected and caught on a monthly basis as opposed to whenever the prostitute gets tested, if ever) with a small black market? :headshake

No setup is perfect, but if you can mandate condom use on the johns in the largest catholic country in the world, I think that is a huge improvement over the other options.

i'm not suggesting that it be made illegal. it will continue no matter what laws are in place. since that is the case i think theat standardized testing, etc. is a good thing. but have you ever been to Brazil? maybe, just maybe if it wasn't quite so openly acceptable and pervasive in their society then you could lower some of the traffic, keep some of the miles off the girls, and hopefully reduce SOME of the possible negative DNA transmission.

Columbia, but not Brazil.

I would love to hear your plan for changing their culture and making sex for money "less acceptable" The catholic church has been trying hard for years, I'm sure they'd love to know too. :unsure:

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.j...5&section=news

BOMBAY (Reuters) - Indian authorities have decided to close some 600 cabarets in the commercial capital Bombay, a government spokesman said Wednesday, robbing the country's entertainment hub of one of its major attractions.

...snip...

The bars are not illegal, but police say some act as a front for prostitution and had cracked down on them last year and arrested hundreds of girls.

But the closure of the cabarets was likely to render jobless more than 150,000 people across the state, including dancers, waiters, bouncers and security guards, officials said.

Bar owners and dancers staged street protests after the decision to close cabarets outside Bombay and they threatened Wednesday to step up demonstrations.

"The government's decision will force a majority of the 75,000 girls working in bars into the flesh trade at one go," said Varsha Kale, president of Bharatiya Bar Girls' Union.

"Most girls working in bars are the only breadwinners in a family. They will now be unable to pay their rent and starve."

once upon a time, in America, nobody could imagine a future where smoking would be looked at as a negative. now the smokers are crying that the world is against them. i'm not saying i want to villainize whores... but it isn't that hard to take it out of the advertising, take it out of sight. if someone wants a whore, they'll still call or go and get one. the person who just compulsively makes his purchase because the woman is right there, might not make the effort to go looking.

in the end, i don't really give a shit about whores in brazil, or their HIV problem... except for the fact that they seem to think it is appropriate to spend my tax dollars on their problem as long as we don't make any demands for change.

I think their point is: Do you think those demands will help the HIV problem? Or make it worse?

They're not asking them to simply take it out of advertising, they're saying the government would have to 'explicitly oppose sex trafficking and prostitution' which would be counterproductive to Brazil's program which as the article points out, is a model of success internationally. I personally don't think the promotion & legality of these things makes much difference, whether it be booze, drugs or prostitutes, legalising them simply makes it safer, easier and keeps the money out of criminals hands.

From the benighted orifice of our commander in chief:

From here: $100 Million in Abstinence-Focused Grants for HIV/AIDS Prevention Awarded Under President Bush's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief

As President Bush remarked in Philadelphia on June 23, "I think our country needs a practical, effective and moral message*. In addition to other kinds of prevention, we need to tell our children that abstinence is the only certain way to avoid contracting HIV*. It works every time."

Emphases mine.

*A swing and a miss. Twice.

but.. but...

Quote:

Originally Posted by lookout

Changes to a program that's already ? So they can be more like us?
We've also made trade deals that restrict other (poor) countries from producing their own generic aids meds. Doesn't that just mean that american tax payers are buying expensive drugs, from american pharmaceutical companies, for poor countries? Who benefits from this? [rhetorical]


I've never been to Brazil, do their whore ads look like this?
http://www.tobaccofreeca.com/_images/undo3.jpg

no - the majority of advertising is a hand on the cock, and the subtle "wanna f*?", or "ever F* a black girl?" - something along those lines.

the print ads are in the newspapers and phonebooks such as they are. not exactly subtle there either.

I think you missed the important part of my post so i'll repeat it. I DON'T REALLY GIVE A SHIT ABOUT WHORES IN BRAZIL, OR THEIR HIV PROBLEM. but, if we are offering $40MM for a problem we didn't create for them, i think we can put whatever stipulations on the funds we want. see? the money, for something that isn't our problem is more annoying to me than the HIV problem in a nation that A) isn't mine, and B) has an open, public, and encouraged sex trade.

Do you really think that any world wide mass communicable disease "Isn't your problem"?

are you suggesting that i might be infected through a handshake? or by making eye contact?

i'm pretty sure that i've been told for the last 20-25 years that if i am monogamous with an uninfected person, don't use needle drugs, and don't make a habit of exchanging DNA with unknown people, i should be ok.

so yeah, i guess i am saying it's not my problem. not to the point where i feel obligated to send them $40MM, and then see them criticize the very people giving them the money.

but for the record... i was stating that their nation isn't mine.

and brazil can tell you to shove your money up your moralizing ass. What's your point?

moralizing? how so? did i say that prostitution should be illegal? hell, i think i'm the only person posting here that is able (or willing) to say i associate with prostitutes. i was responding to the notion that it was out of bounds to require some changes in their open prostitution system in exchange for $40MM.

i don't care who does who. i do care about the money. or at least the $.0003 of it that is probably from me. :D

I think you might have thought I was referring to you directly, you referred to yourself as part of America (we) so I used the same in return. How so? Saying the prostitution should be illegal is *exactly* the string attached to the money and (here the Brazillian governmnet agrees with me) the reasons for it are arguably moral rather than logical. I haven't seen anyone here refute the quotes and report I linked about the effect or legalization of prostitution on STD rates.