A thought (they happen to me sometimes).
Stats say many female prostitutes in the West are drug addicts, needing "easy money" for their next fix. Actually damn hard money, but anyway - they need the fix, so they need the money, and prostitution is all they can see as the route.
Compare the other way though. Stats also say a large percentage of crimes against property (and a fair chunk of muggings) are from male drug addicts. Again, they need the fix, but there's no other option for them.
So would the absence of prostitution as an option for female drug addicts not make crime *worse*...?
And would a better solution to both problems not be to clean the poor bastards up and give them a route out? Current proposals in the UK are that drug-related crime might not result in a prison sentence. I'd actually rather they ended up locked up somewhere *and* that somewhere had compulsory rehabilitation, bcos it's going to be better for everyone. Shame that the money from the "war on drugs" didn't also find its way to halfway houses and rehab centres.
Similarly on people-trafficking. Bollocks to whether they're being exploited for prostitution or regular domestic work (eg. servants in Saudi Arabia) or manual work like cockle-picking or farm labour - the fact that they're being exploited at all is good enough reason to stop it happening.
As far as I can see, all Emily Bazon's reasons for banning prostitution are symptoms of people either thinking they have no other option or being literally forced into it. It's missing the point of the real problems.
No, I can't imagine myself using a prostitute, but clearly there are people who do feel that need. As far as sex goes, there are a whole bunch of areas where this is the case. And for two groups whose reasons can be understood fairly easily, it's worth mentioning not-out gays who are known to use prostitutes as a way of dealing with the fact that they can't handle identifying with being gay, and disabled people who find attractinging a partner difficult because of their disability.