NationStates Jolt Archive

'If you don't take a job as a prostitute, we can stop your benefits' (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/01/30/wgerm30.xml)

The essential details: An unemployed woman in Berlin recieved a letter from the job centre telling an employer was interested in her. The employer turned ot to be a legal brothel. She didn't accept the job, and now her unemployment benefits are threatened.

What do you think?

'If you don't take a job as a prostitute, we can stop your benefits' (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/01/30/wgerm30.xml)

The essential details: An unemployed woman in Berlin recieved a letter from the job centre telling an employer was interested in her. The employer turned ot to be a legal brothel. She didn't accept the job, and now her unemployment benefits are threatened.

What do you think?

Welcome to the wonderful world of socialized medicine and moral corruption. I certainly don't want to live anywhere that this kind of thing could possibly be an issue.

DA posted a thread about this yesterday. I think.

You think correctly, my friend.

Surely this woman will get redress. Her refusal is perfectly acceptable.

You think correctly, my friend.
Ooh, this one has a spiffy poll though!
:eek:

Ooh, this one has a spiffy poll though!
:eek:

Thank you. :)

As a general rule, I would state that someone turning down a job should not be able to receive any government benefits. However, I do not believe someone can be forced into doing something they have a reason to find morally reprehensible. As such, she should have the outlet of filing a specific objection to the job placement based on being a "consciencious objector" of sorts. However, if she does this repeatedly, at many different jobs, there has to be a limit. Otherwise, you'll end up with people claiming that work itself is morally reprehensible to them.

As a general rule, I would state that someone turning down a job should not be able to receive any government benefits. However, I do not believe someone can be forced into doing something they have a reason to find morally reprehensible. As such, she should have the outlet of filing a specific objection to the job placement based on being a "consciencious objector" of sorts. However, if she does this repeatedly, at many different jobs, there has to be a limit. Otherwise, you'll end up with people claiming that work itself is morally reprehensible to them.

Yes, but i think prostitution is a perfectly legitimate reason to turn down that offer. The brothel shouldn't even be using the service.

Yes, but i think prostitution is a perfectly legitimate reason to turn down that offer. The brothel shouldn't even be using the service.

I agree that prostitution is something that many people find morally reprehensible and is something that many women would rather starve than go into. As such, I think it is perfectly acceptable reason to refuse the job offer.

I wouldn't say that the brothel shouldn't use the service, however. By law, they are a legitimate employer and there is no reason they should not use it. There are many who would have little problem with such a placement.

Wow, I didn't know prostitution was legal in Germany! I can't wait to go this summer!

Anyways, I don't think prostitution should legal at all, but who am I to tell them how to run their country. I believe they should be able to refuse a job if it poses a serious health issue. In this case it would be std's. And also, if a woman is forced against her will to provide sexual acts, how is that not rape?

This is an interesting issue and I'd like to see how it turns out.

I agree that prostitution is something that many people find morally reprehensible and is something that many women would rather starve than go into. As such, I think it is perfectly acceptable.

I wouldn't say that the brothel shouldn't use the service, however. By law, they are a legitimate employer and there is no reason they should not use it. There are many who would have little problem with such a placement.

Aye, but then, those women who have no problem with it can apply directly for the brothel if they are so keen on it. I imagine it is pretty degrading for women seeking work through an employment agency to receive an offer from a brothel, let alone be forced to accept it.

Yes, but i think prostitution is a perfectly legitimate reason to turn down that offer. The brothel shouldn't even be using the service.
If and as prostitution is legal in Germany, I think brothels should be able to search employees through job centers. Just like every other employer.

Oh, just make it clear. Of course they should NOT be able to force anyone to work there.

Aye, but then, those women who have no problem with it can apply directly for the brothel if they are so keen on it. I imagine it is pretty degrading for women seeking work through an employment agency to receive an offer from a brothel, let alone be forced to accept it.

If the women see the offer itself as degrading, that is their problem.

As far as not being forced to accept it, I have already stated that they should not.

If and as prostitution is legal in Germany, I think brothels should be able to search employees through job centers. Just like every other employer.

I support prostitution being legal, but as I said, if you put yourself in the shoes of that woman, it would be pretty degrading being told that you're perfectly suited to that line of work. I think that's unfair on the people out of work to have to put up with that.

If the women see the offer itself as degrading, that is their problem.
Would you go up to a woman and tell her she would make a good prostitute? I don't think so. It's offensive and certainly shouldn't be done through official channels like this.

God, that's halarious!

If I were her, I'd jump a train to Switzerland.

Would you go up to a woman and tell her she would make a good prostitute?

What would a brothel look for? Well, an attractive woman. Would I tell a woman she is attractive? Absolutely. It is no different from telling a woman that she would make a good model.

I don't think so. It's offensive and certainly shouldn't be done through official channels like this.

These women obviously need work. There is no reason to rule out certain jobs because some might find it offensive.

Would you go up to a woman and tell her she would make a good prostitute? I don't think so. It's offensive and certainly shouldn't be done through official channels like this.
Hmm. Alright. If they do it like that...

But informing about vacant jobs is perfectly alright. Unemployed can check all the vacant jobs from database. I don't think the job center has to inform every single unemployed woman about this "opportunity".

These women obviously need work. There is no reason to rule out certain jobs because some might find it offensive.

Okay, a compromise. They should be able to choose whether or not they want to receive offers from the sex industry when they sign for unemployment benefits. Then everyone is happy.

This is typical for the installment of german laws. I dont know about other countries legislative, but how it works here is like most modern software. At first a stable beta-version is shipped, followed by several patches and then a 2.0 version sometimes later. You can expect that this little hole in the law will be closed pretty quickly, now that a precedent is set. It isnt like there is a law that force people especially into being sex workers. But no one thought of the possibility of a legal employer possibly being morally questionable. Mainly because the full legality of brothels came into being after the laws concerning unemployment etc. In the latest update to those laws they overlooked the possibility for this to happen. Next patch will fix this, for sure. Right now, the letter of the law makes for a rather stupid situation, but most likely a solution that is more in the spirit of the law, protection of the citizen, will be found.

Okay, a compromise. They should be able to choose whether or not they want to receive offers from the sex industry when they sign for unemployment benefits. Then everyone is happy.
That was fast. And rare. Solution in 19 posts. *applauds*

That was fast. And rare. Solution in 19 posts. *applauds*

:) *bows*

This is typical for the installment of german laws. I dont know about other countries legislative, but how it works here is like most modern software. At first a stable beta-version is shipped, followed by several patches and then a 2.0 version sometimes later. You can expect that this little hole in the law will be closed pretty quickly, now that a precedent is set. It isnt like there is a law that force people especially into being sex workers. But no one thought of the possibility of a legal employer possibly being morally questionable. Mainly because the full legality of brothels came into being after the laws concerning unemployment etc. In the latest update to those laws they overlooked the possibility for this to happen. Next patch will fix this, for sure. Right now, the letter of the law makes for a rather stupid situation, but most likely a solution that is more in the spirit of the law, protection of the citizen, will be found.

IANAL, but the article says diffrent:

The government had considered making brothels an exception on moral grounds, but decided that it would be too difficult to distinguish them from bars. As a result, job centres must treat employers looking for a prostitute in the same way as those looking for a dental nurse.

When the waitress looked into suing the job centre, she found out that it had not broken the law. Job centres that refuse to penalise people who turn down a job by cutting their benefits face legal action from the potential employer.

Okay, a compromise. They should be able to choose whether or not they want to receive offers from the sex industry when they sign for unemployment benefits. Then everyone is happy.

That works. I would assume they give someone looking for a job a questionaire of some sort. Extreme moral aversion to such jobs could certainly be included on it.

Welcome to the wonderful world of socialized medicine and moral corruption. I certainly don't want to live anywhere that this kind of thing could possibly be an issue.
Right, because it's better to not have any unemployment benefits at all than to risk losing your unemployment benefits... :rolleyes:

As a general rule, I would state that someone turning down a job should not be able to receive any government benefits. However, I do not believe someone can be forced into doing something they have a reason to find morally reprehensible. As such, she should have the outlet of filing a specific objection to the job placement based on being a "consciencious objector" of sorts. However, if she does this repeatedly, at many different jobs, there has to be a limit. Otherwise, you'll end up with people claiming that work itself is morally reprehensible to them.

My stand exactly. As I posted on the other thread, I couldn't take a job as a sex worker or in a slaughterhouse. While I wouldn't like a job scrubbing toilets, I have no moral objection to it. Merely an aesthetic one.

i would lvoe to know how many people live in germany or even europe


lets worry about america and let thsoe crazy germans deal with themselves, you can worry about this shit in the states after you get prostitution legalized

IANAL, but the article says diffrent:
The point here being excluding brothels as potential employers from using the job advertising system of the employment agencies. Brothels do employ people besides prostitutes, that is the point. The parliament just overlooked the automatism of cutting benefits for non-acceptance of a job. Besides, the wording regarding this contains the word "zumutbar". This does not translate easy, but reflects a mix between acceptable, ability to comply and not being completely opposed to. The normal interpreation of this would be not to force someone into being a prostitute. But since there is no real ban on it in the law another intepreation could be used, as is the case here.
Believe me, the law will be fixed very soon, the conservatives will bring it up, the social democrats will agree, the smaller factions will discuss it a bit, and it will pass with a huge majority.

i would lvoe to know how many people live in germany or even europe
Link for the lazy (http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/gm.html)

Is this another victory for liberal socialism? I am confused.

Aye, but then, those women who have no problem with it can apply directly for the brothel if they are so keen on it. I imagine it is pretty degrading for women seeking work through an employment agency to receive an offer from a brothel, let alone be forced to accept it.
:headbang: Agreed

i would lvoe to know how many people live in germany or even europe


lets worry about america and let thsoe crazy germans deal with themselves, you can worry about this shit in the states after you get prostitution legalized


It's already legal in Nevada. There's no national law against prostitution.
The same issue could be relevant here if someone on unemployment is offered a job as a housekeeper for a known sex offender, or stuffing envelopes for a Southern Baptist church.

I lived in Germany for two years. Yes, prostitution is legal, and there's nothing wrong with that as far as I'm concerned.

Having your local unemployment office force you into prostitution - that seems wrong to me.

But, I'll say that it's their country. If they want to force women (and possibly men) into prostitution, then it's their nation state.

I doubt if the woman will really have any recourse. She'll either be bending over at a brothel taking it up the ass, or bending over at the unemployment bureau taking it up the ass.

Might as well get paid for being abused.

I hate prostitution. I think it's one of the most disgusting institutions in human history, right up there with serfdom and slavery. Legalization as far as I'm concerned, isn't a solution - but neither is criminalizing and treating the very people who are enslaved and exploited by this reprehensible practice as the transgressors.

This whole incident just goes to show that, even with all the gains and leaps made in women's rights over the past decades, the exploitation of women has yet to become a thing of the pass - and probably never will, until the underlying economic and social relationships that make it possible are overthrown.

Something everyone seems to be ignoring is that the woman isn't being forced to do anything at all. Her unemployment benefits depend on her making the best efforts possible to get a job, and if she isn't willing to accept a job when it's offered she may lose the benefits, but its her choice.

Having said that, I agree that if you object to some profession on moral grounds, you shouldn't lost your benefits for those beliefs. But if Germany has decided that prostitution is a morally acceptable line of work, then that sort of exemption should only be granted to people who believe strongly that it is morally wrong - not those who just find it unpleasant.

The article doesn't really make clear what her grounds for objection were.

Morality aside, maybe she didn't like the idea of having to sexually service (in any or all orifices) multiple total strangers on a daily basis.

Morality aside, maybe she didn't like the idea of having to sexually service (in any or all orifices) multiple total strangers on a daily basis.

But that's exactly my point! If her objections are moral, that's understandable. But if she just doesn't like the job, why should the government continue to support her while plenty of other people are doing jobs they don't like?

Making exceptions for women who don't want to work in the sex industry is unfair to everyone else who is forced take degrading jobs. Prostitution is no worse than any other job and much better than some. If you don't want to consider that possibility then just don't become unemployed. Try harder to keep your old job or just don't claim unemployment benefits. As a matter of fairness, these women shouldn't be granted special privilages.

However, any system that forces people to work in inately unfair. Instead of making people work the German government should just pay everyone a healthy annual salary for just being citizens. It would be much easier for everyone. It works pretty well for Kuwait.

Making exceptions for women who don't want to work in the sex industry is unfair to everyone else who is forced take degrading jobs. Prostitution is no worse than any other job and much better than some. If you don't want to consider that possibility then just don't become unemployed. Try harder to keep your old job or just don't claim unemployment benefits. As a matter of fairness, these women shouldn't be granted special privilages.

However, any system that forces people to work in inately unfair. Instead of making people work the German government should just pay everyone a healthy annual salary for just being citizens. It would be much easier for everyone. It works pretty well for Kuwait.

I didn't know they did that in Kuwait! Still, Kuwait is a very small very wealthy country, and what is possible there, probably wouldn't be possible in Germany. And is it just the citizens who are paid? I just looked it up and only 772,000 of 2,238,000 residents are citizens. (link) (http://www.kuwait-info.org/Fact_Sheets/political_system.htm)

Here is a litle fun fact. There is absolutely no trace of this in the german media. The only thing that turns up is a article in the "taz", a german left-leaning daily based in Berlin, that described the theoretic possibility on base of the letter of the law alone. This article was recently written and rest assured, a concrete example of this happening would have been covered.
But dont let this facts stop you speculating how crazy, immoral etc us germans are. :p

Well, Kuwait gets away with it by exploiting foreign (non-USian) workers and using (well paid) USians to drill their oil.

Still, I'm sure Germany can exploit foreigners if they set their mind to it. It worked fairly well in WWII.

'If you don't take a job as a prostitute, we can stop your benefits' (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/01/30/wgerm30.xml)

The essential details: An unemployed woman in Berlin recieved a letter from the job centre telling an employer was interested in her. The employer turned ot to be a legal brothel. She didn't accept the job, and now her unemployment benefits are threatened.

What do you think? :D I think it's very funny. HAHAHAHA! I'm happy when I can laugh at foreigners. :D

:D I think it's very funny. HAHAHAHA! I'm happy when I can laugh at foreigners. :D

The world dies a little, throws a dart at a pic of the USA...

Here is a litle fun fact. There is absolutely no trace of this in the german media. The only thing that turns up is a article in the "taz", a german left-leaning daily based in Berlin, that described the theoretic possibility on base of the letter of the law alone. This article was recently written and rest assured, a concrete example of this happening would have been covered.
But dont let this facts stop you speculating how crazy, immoral etc us germans are. :p

That's really odd. So either the telegraph made it up entirely, or the German media is, for unknown reasons, ignoring the issue.

Are you sure this isn't being reported in Germany? It just seems bizzare. :confused:

The world dies a little, throws a dart at a pic of the USA...
Please don't. I don't speak for my country (except when I'm saying nice things). Really though, I tire of being laughed at.

That's really odd. So either the telegraph made it up entirely, or the German media is, for unknown reasons, ignoring the issue.

Are you sure this isn't being reported in Germany? It just seems bizzare. :confused:
Yes, i am quite sure. I read two daily newspapers, the major news magazines online and am fully able to do a google search in my native tongue that should turn up the respective results.
Maybe the Telegraph referred wrongly to the taz article, there are parallels: it comes from Berlin, it mentions the word waitress together with brothel (as in: waitress in a brothel), a comparison between working in a bar (as in: dancer in a no-touch tabledance bar) and a bartending job in a brothel as being borderline cases in which the work might be considered eligible for even proposing it to unemployed women etc.

Yes, i am quite sure. I read two daily newspapers, the major news magazines online and am fully able to do a google search in my native tongue that should turn up the respective results.
Maybe the Telegraph referred wrongly to the taz article, there are parallels: it comes from Berlin, it mentions the word waitress together with brothel (as in: waitress in a brothel), a comparison between working in a bar (as in: dancer in a no-touch tabledance bar) and a bartending job in a brothel as being borderline cases in which the work might be considered eligible for even proposing it to unemployed women etc.

Heh. Ok, you're probably right then. Just one more incident to add to my list of reasons to mistrust the media.

I wish reporters were held accountable for verifying what they say. I like the idea of public flogging whenever they're caught in an error or lie, though a severe fine might work too. :D

Man, I'm kinda disapointed. I checked online in Germany's best newspaper, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, and in the worst, Bild, and couldn't find any mention of this incident. If they were able to threaten to take away her benefits by not working at this club, why wouldn't they do that to every women (or man possibly) who would refuse just to get a prostitution license and work on the street?

Well, I'm German and this incident is really not mentioned in the media... even not in the yellow press.
However I can't the employment center really forces (okay they don't really force her, but getting no benefits is an unacceptable option...) the woman to become a prostitute. I think it's okay if the center offers the job to a (wo)man but if he/she refuses to take this "unusual" job the employment center has to accept it, in my opinion. Well, I would rather clean toilets than having sex with anyone...
I hope the woman's refusal will be accepted and that they'll offer her another job as there are enough (wo)man who aren't disaffected with working as a prostitute.

A few days ago me and my dad (Who's a cop who works in vice squad) were having a discussion about legalising prostitution. He's against it and one of his reasons was because he could see women being blackmailed into prostitute jobs if they didn't want to see their benefits stopped. I said that they would probably end up making exceptions for it but he told me not to count on it! Damn he's gonna be smug!

As for the issue itself, I think it's appalling. Nobody should be forced into a job which is morally reprehensible to such a huge section of society. If this is the sort of thing that's in store then I don't think that legalising prostitution will ever be a good idea.

For those of you in Germany who think the woman should have to take the job, the next time you're unemployed, I'm going to arrive in Germany with a hundred euros just for you. Either I get to have my way with you sexually, or I'll be calling the unemployment office.

Here is a litle fun fact. There is absolutely no trace of this in the german media. The only thing that turns up is a article in the "taz", a german left-leaning daily based in Berlin, that described the theoretic possibility on base of the letter of the law alone. This article was recently written and rest assured, a concrete example of this happening would have been covered.
But dont let this facts stop you speculating how crazy, immoral etc us germans are. :p

Thanks. I had a suspicion it might not be legit. However, it makes a good springboard for discussion. :)

Here's (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=583&ncid=583&e=9&u=/nm/20050201/od_nm/germany_prostitute_dc) an article that actually refutes the claim in the original link. This has been a topic of speculation for some time in Germany and Daistallia 2104's article was probably an extension of this. It is however just speculation and the government has issued a statement saying it's not gonna happen. They can recruit, but jobs will not be posted and no one will be penalized for not taking such work. Such a recruitment letter probably started this whole misunderstanding.