“Prostitution should be abolished”.

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: " “Prostitution should be abolished”. ". Your opponent's style: aggressive and confrontational

I'll generate your opening argument for the position that prostitution should be abolished: --- **Opening Argument: Prostitution Should Be Abolished** Prostitution isn't just another job - it's the commodification of human intimacy that destroys both individuals and society. When we normalize buying and selling sexual access to bodies, we create a system where the most vulnerable people become products for those with economic power. The evidence is overwhelming: the vast majority of people in prostitution experienced childhood sexual abuse, entered as minors, and face astronomical rates of violence and PTSD. This isn't coincidence - it's the predictable result of an industry built on exploitation. Countries that legalized prostitution saw massive increases in sex trafficking, proving that regulation only legitimizes harm. Most fundamentally, human sexuality and intimacy cannot be separated from personhood. When we allow people to purchase sexual compliance, we normalize the idea that consent can be bought, bodies can be rented, and human dignity has a price tag. This corrupts our understanding of healthy relationships and genuine consent across society. True equality means rejecting systems where economic desperation forces people into sexual servitude. We must abolish prostitution to protect the vulnerable and preserve human dignity. --- This opening establishes your position clearly and sets up strong moral, practical, and social arguments against prostitution.

You're living in a fantasy world if you think abolition protects anyone. Every single place that's tried your moralistic crusade has made things infinitely worse for the very people you claim to care about. Look at what happened when they cracked down in places like Atlanta and Phoenix - sex workers got pushed underground, lost safety networks, and faced more violence, not less. Your "protection" becomes persecution. These are adults making economic choices, and your paternalistic attitude strips them of agency while putting them in actual danger.Your "vulnerable people" narrative crumbles when you look at New Zealand - over 90 percent of sex workers believed decriminalisation gave them employment, legal and health rights, with 64 percent finding it easier to refuse clients [1]. That's empowerment, not exploitation. Meanwhile, your prohibition model creates the exact violence you claim to prevent. When you criminalize, workers can't screen clients safely, can't work together for protection, and can't call police without fear. In decriminalised environments, workers can install security equipment, refuse difficult clients, and contact police without fear of prosecution [1]. The trafficking scare stories? Pure fiction. Research suggests decriminalisation had little impact on the number of people working in the sex industry [1], and New Zealand has not reported any changes in rates of human trafficking [1]. Your moral panic isn't backed by evidence - it's backed by ideology that puts workers in danger to make you feel righteous.

You want to talk about New Zealand's tiny experiment while ignoring Germany's massive failure? Germany legalized prostitution in 2002 and the result has been catastrophic - the number of prostitutes working in Germany is estimated to have more than doubled to some 400,000 since then while the number of cases of trafficking in human beings for sexual exploitation has risen significantly [1]. Your "adult choice" fantasy crumbles when according to several studies, 90 percent of them are victims of human trafficking [1]. These aren't empowered entrepreneurs - they're women from the poorest regions of Europe: Romania, Bulgaria with around 95% of prostituted women coming from other countries. It has become a prostitution of poverty [1]. The real kicker? Cross-country comparisons of Sweden with Denmark and Germany are consistent with the quantitative analysis, showing that trafficking inflows decreased with criminalization and increased with legalization [1]. Your "protection through legalization" model has created exactly what I warned against - a massive pipeline of human misery where more than a million men now pay for sex with Germany's approximately 400,000 prostitutes every day [1]. Germany tried your approach and even their own police admit it failed spectacularly. When 90% of people in your "regulated industry" are trafficking victims, you're

You're cherry-picking the worst-case scenarios while ignoring the fundamental flaw in your argument - you're confusing correlation with causation and using inflated statistics from advocacy groups. The law from 2002 didn't help to prevent trafficking at all: in 2000, they were 151 persons condemned for trafficking, in 2011 only 32. The police recorded 636 cases of trafficked women in 2011, 3 times less than 10 years before. Your "90% trafficking" figure comes from advocacy organizations, not rigorous research. Meanwhile, official statistics show a decrease since 2002 (the year of legalization) in the number of persons certified as trafficking victims and the number convicted of sex trafficking, pimping, and exploitation of sex workers. The real problem isn't legalization - it's Germany's botched implementation and lack of proper regulation. The report revealed a failure to achieve significant progress with regard to the social goals of the Prostitution Act. On the matter of legal remedies for defrauded workers or coercion in violation of the brothel owner's limited power to give instruction, the ministry found little evidence that workers had availed themselves of the courts. Your prohibition fantasy ignores what actually happens - workers get pushed underground where they face more violence, not less. The solution isn't abolishing adult choice but fixing broken regulatory systems. Germany failed because they legalized without proper oversight, not because legalization itself is wrong.