Does Firefly promote Prostitution?

POSTED BY: Succatash
UPDATED: Monday, January 26, 2004 05:41
VIEWED: 17201
PAGE 3 of 8

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT PAGE

CAPTAINCDC

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 6:36 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by BrownCoat1:
Steve580 wrote:
Quote:
Prostitution, along with gambling, and anti-drug laws, are all illegal for one reason, and one reason only: the 'general public' views them as 'wrong'. They fall into the category of "moral crimes" - actions that do not risk harming others in any way, and shouldn't be illegal for any reason.

I agree that they fall into the "moral crimes" area, but I think part of the reason they are illegal is the fact the a government can not tax them. The gov't does not like being left out of it "fair" share of any money or service changing hands. You can rest assured that the legalized prostitution in Las Vegas is monitored and taxed. If the gov't could do that w/ prostitution and drugs across the country, and the moral uproar of voters could be quelled, they would do it in a minute.

"May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one."

I disagree. Look at Amsterdam. They could do it if they were not too busy being on their moral high horse. They are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites.

May have been the losing side. Still not convinced it was the wrong one.

RAINE

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 7:23 PM

That would be too simplistic to say Firefly promotes prostitution. Whedon depicts that world's morality with a lot of complex shades.

Inara's smart, beautiful, classy. She's from an elite geisha-type background. Yet, it really gets under Mal's skin when she "spreads", as he so crudely puts it, for other men. And Inara cried her eyes out after Mal bedded down with her prositute friend. (This was the episode about the Firefly crew helping out a group of whores who were fighting a big baddie intent on claiming "his" baby).

I like the way Firefly shows the tension of Mal and Inara's longings, that they would like to have exclusive claims on each other, experience romance and fidelilty. But they don't believe they can, or want to. This kind of romantic tension is pure gold, so that's why Whedon probably wouldn't have had them consummating their desires anytime soon.

MANIACNUMBERONE

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 7:58 PM

Firefly doesn't really promote prostitution, it's more of a showcase for it. Like it's a showcase for smuggling.
Neither are really looked upon as great things by all, but just the way things are and have to be for the moment.
Now guns! Firefly promotes guns.

And as for the great and satisfying argument about what is a prostitute versus companion, mmmm, wow. To me it's easy to define. I think of it like genus and species in the animal or plant world. Not all dogs are Spaniels. But all Spaniels are dogs. They are like a sub-classification of a basic understanding of dog. Even though they don't all look or act the same, they have some very basic similarities, which group them.

Not all prostitutes are companions. They can be like those in Heart of Gold. Lesser breed of companion, but still a prostitute, because the basic definition of a prostitute is someone giving sex for compensation. Regardless of whatever training (breeding) they might have, however they may dress themselves up, (as Atherton Wing would say) they still perform that basic defining fucntion. Give 'em all the tea, witty conversation and red curtains you like, can't change the basics.

WYDRAZ

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 8:50 PM

Yeah, right.

Firefly promotes prostitution just like it promotes smugglin', cattle rustlin' and shootin' guys in hats. I suppose your next argument will be that video games promote murder.

SPIKESPIEGEL

Wednesday, January 21, 2004 11:42 PM

Video games TOTALLY promote murder. Mostly they make me want to murder the people who hog the controller.

I'd say the show does not promote ANYTHING except good storytelling. Companions, the Alliance, smuggling, emotional wounds left untended or unacknowledged, marital struggles -- it's all grist for telling good stories. After all, Joss is on record as being an atheist, but Book is a positive character of strong faith ... clearly Joss is in it to tell stories, not to push any agenda.

On the related discussion ... I think prostitution should be legal and licensed. There would always be unlicensed street prostitution to some degree, just as there is still illegitimate traffic in alcohol and cigarettes. But a whole lot less since the end of Prohibition ...

If being a licensed prostitute included, say, health education, counseling, sensitivity training and an illustrated copy of the Kama Sutra, plus regular medical checks to renew the license, we'd have a lot fewer problems. Add to that restrictions on where and how it's practiced, just as liquor stores and porn shops are controlled, and you have even fewer problems.

And it might even promote stratification ... it might start the evolution to more refined forms, more educated and skilled practitioners ... true companions.

Plus, you know, sex is good.

"Bang."

MANIACNUMBERONE

Thursday, January 22, 2004 5:32 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by wydraz:
Yeah, right.

Firefly promotes prostitution just like it promotes smugglin', cattle rustlin' and shootin' guys in hats. I suppose your next argument will be that video games promote murder.

ha ha ha ha ha... yer funny.

SUCCATASH

Thursday, January 22, 2004 6:28 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ManiacNumberOne:
Quote:
Originally posted by wydraz:
Firefly promotes prostitution just like it promotes smugglin', cattle rustlin' and shootin' guys in hats. I suppose your next argument will be that video games promote murder.
ha ha ha ha ha... yer funny.

Is Wydraz telling a knee slapping joke or is he making a point?

PANIC

Thursday, January 22, 2004 10:03 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SpikeSpiegel:
Video games TOTALLY promote murder. Mostly they make me want to murder the people who hog the controller.

That is quite possibly the funniest thing I have read in the last month.

DRAKON

Thursday, January 22, 2004 10:47 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Steve580:
Yes, sex can cause babies. However, as it is, prostitution in most areas is unmonitered by anyone; therefore the spread of disease and unwanted pregnancies is a common problem amoung hookers. Legalizing prostitution, though, makes these issues go away. I'm sure that more than one form of protection is used, so the chance of either of the above happining is slim to none. So really, this first argument of yours is one supporting legalization, in disguise. And sure, there is the chance that a man will use prostitutes rather than spend money on things for his famialy...but is that a reason to make it a *crime*? To arrest people? People can become obsessed with movie stars, which can cause problems...but does this mean we should ban movies?

The point I was really arguing with was that morality and politics (or law) are somehow disconnected from reality. That morality is nothing more than some religion's idea of how things "should" be or a means of controlling a population. All may be true, however, morality does affect the real world and more importantly the real world affects morality.

What morality is, is a set of rules that govern behavior. And behavior is actions, and actions have consequences. Real world consequences including life and death.

If a particular moral system or rule does not work, does not result in less death, dismemberment or misery than an alternative, the original rule will be abandoned, and the alternative will be adopted.

But even that is not quite right, because folks act on what they THINK the world is, rather than how it really is. Sometimes people are wrong, and it don't matter if its one man, or a billion. Inaccurate mental models of reality will result in actions that develop unexpected consequences.

So, if the general public perception is that say, drinking, drug use, gambling or prostitution causes more problems than is solves, these things will get banned, and moral taboos will be placed on those actions. Even if it makes no rational sense, or if the causitive mechanism is not understood, that is the way people will act.

Quote:
Drug use can lead to violence and irresponcable behavior...but alchohal never does? You need to ask yourself: alchohal causes so many problems in society, so why is it legal?

The prohibitions against alcohol and other drugs developed at the same time, and for roughly the same reason. Too many drunk hubbies were coming home and beating their wives. So the wives got together, formed temperance unions, started smashing saloons, and finally got alcohol prohibited by constitutional amendment.

But unlike say pot, too many people were drinking to make prohibition effective. The result was political corruption, and the rise of the mobs, especially in Chicago and New York, but everywhere as well. Because too many folks were violating the prohibition against alcohol, the attempts at enforcement of that ban failed miserably.

In fact it can be argued that all such prohibitions did was not solve the problem, but forced it underground, making the problem harder to see. Again in the case of alcohol, too many folks were openly violating the ban to make the ban anything but a joke. So the prohibition on alcohol eventually got repealed.

The real difference between the prohibition of alcohol and other drugs, like pot, coke, etc. is more a matter of demographics rather than rational principles.

Quote:
Hey, if there was a third option, a "remove prostitution and drugs from society" option, I'd gladly choose that. But we have to live in the *real* world. Politicians need realize this. Hey, if I wanted to, I could obtain almost any type of illegal drug. I could find a hooker for you, too.

I don't know about that last part. I've been told I am powerfully ugly.

(Even if you could, keep it quiet, in case my wife sees this.

) You are right, we do live in the real world, whether we have to or not, we do.

There is another aspect th

STEVE580

Thursday, January 22, 2004 11:21 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Drakon:
But unlike say pot, too many people were drinking to make prohibition effective. The result was political corruption, and the rise of the mobs, especially in Chicago and New York, but everywhere as well. Because too many folks were violating the prohibition against alcohol, the attempts at enforcement of that ban failed miserably.

But the ban on marijuana has not failed? I disagree...

Even if it hasn't, that isn't a reason to outlaw it. If driving was prohibited, surely we would see fewer cars on the road...but is that a *reason* to ban driving? Likewise, outlawing drugs reduces drug use - but that doesn't justify a ban on drug use.

Quote:
In fact it can be argued that all such prohibitions did was not solve the problem, but forced it underground, making the problem harder to see. Again in the case of alcohol, too many folks were openly violating the ban to make the ban anything but a joke. So the prohibition on alcohol eventually got repealed.

Again, I beleive the same could be said of marijuana. So why hasn't that law been repealed, I wonder?

Quote:
For some folks if its the choice between prohibitions on drink, or get beat up by a drunk husband, they'll sacrifice liberty to avoid getting killed.

But should they be able to sacrifice my liberty, because they married a drunk? I vote 'no'.

I'm generally in favor of freedom over protection. The only things that should be crimes are actions that violate the freedoms of others, in my mind. Homicide, rape, arson - these all affect others. More minor things like public drunkeness, or assualt also affect others, just less so (BTW, for anyone who didn't know, assualt is threatening violence). But I were using herion right now, alone in my house...that affects no one but myself.

...I'm not, by the way.

Quote:
And when you think about it, freedom don't mean a thing if you're dead.

Ah, but what is it to live, without freedom?

-Steve

PREV PAGE 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NEXT PAGE