Skip to main content Skip to navigation


<?xml version="1.0"?>

<!DOCTYPE TEI.2 SYSTEM "base.dtd">





<publicationStmt><distributor>BASE and Oxford Text Archive</distributor>


<availability><p>The British Academic Spoken English (BASE) corpus was developed at the

Universities of Warwick and Reading, under the directorship of Hilary Nesi

(Centre for English Language Teacher Education, Warwick) and Paul Thompson

(Department of Applied Linguistics, Reading), with funding from BALEAP,

EURALEX, the British Academy and the Arts and Humanities Research Board. The

original recordings are held at the Universities of Warwick and Reading, and

at the Oxford Text Archive and may be consulted by bona fide researchers

upon written application to any of the holding bodies.

The BASE corpus is freely available to researchers who agree to the

following conditions:</p>

<p>1. The recordings and transcriptions should not be modified in any


<p>2. The recordings and transcriptions should be used for research purposes

only; they should not be reproduced in teaching materials</p>

<p>3. The recordings and transcriptions should not be reproduced in full for

a wider audience/readership, although researchers are free to quote short

passages of text (up to 200 running words from any given speech event)</p>

<p>4. The corpus developers should be informed of all presentations or

publications arising from analysis of the corpus</p><p>

Researchers should acknowledge their use of the corpus using the following

form of words:

The recordings and transcriptions used in this study come from the British

Academic Spoken English (BASE) corpus, which was developed at the

Universities of Warwick and Reading under the directorship of Hilary Nesi

(Warwick) and Paul Thompson (Reading). Corpus development was assisted by

funding from the Universities of Warwick and Reading, BALEAP, EURALEX, the

British Academy and the Arts and Humanities Research Board. </p></availability>




<recording dur="00:42:52" n="5269">


<respStmt><name>BASE team</name>



<langUsage><language id="en">English</language>



<person id="nm1157" role="main speaker" n="n" sex="m"><p>nm1157, main speaker, non-student, male</p></person>

<personGrp id="ss" role="audience" size="l"><p>ss, audience, large group </p></personGrp>

<personGrp id="sl" role="all" size="l"><p>sl, all, large group</p></personGrp>

<personGrp role="speakers" size="3"><p>number of speakers: 3</p></personGrp>





<item n="speechevent">Lecture</item>

<item n="acaddept">Law</item>

<item n="acaddiv">ss</item>

<item n="partlevel">UG</item>

<item n="module">unknown</item>




<u who="nm1157"> today's topic <pause dur="0.6"/> is <pause dur="0.2"/> the <pause dur="0.4"/> law relating to prostitution <pause dur="1.8"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> which is also <pause dur="0.2"/> # to be the topic of our seminars <pause dur="0.2"/> next <pause dur="0.2"/> week <pause dur="1.6"/> as you will see <pause dur="0.5"/> # the focus <pause dur="0.6"/> next <pause dur="0.2"/> week <pause dur="0.9"/> is really on <pause dur="0.9"/> the issue of policy what should the <pause dur="0.4"/> law's policy be in relation to prostitution <pause dur="0.9"/> # and by policy we mean of course <pause dur="0.8"/> what should the law be doing in order to deal with any <pause dur="0.3"/> problems if any are found <pause dur="0.5"/> relating to prostitution <pause dur="0.5"/> # in order to # alleviate <pause dur="0.2"/> such problems <pause dur="0.6"/> and make the world better which is what policy is all about <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> because we're going to be discussing policy in seminars <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> the lectures i'm going to give you <pause dur="0.4"/> are going to focus very much on the law <pause dur="0.7"/> # and i suppose i will be perhaps holding back from policy issues <pause dur="1.0"/> what this means of course is that <pause dur="0.3"/> you mustn't assume that <pause dur="0.4"/> all the answers to next week's seminar <pause dur="0.4"/> are to be found in today's lecture <pause dur="1.0"/> # today's lecture is going to give you some of the material for next week's seminar <pause dur="0.3"/> but you're going to have to go further <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> in the reading which we provide for you and

indeed in your own <pause dur="0.4"/> thoughts <pause dur="2.1"/> right <pause dur="0.2"/> prostitution and the law <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> the first question i suppose is <pause dur="1.0"/> what is the law trying to achieve <pause dur="0.8"/> # in relation to prostitution <pause dur="1.4"/> # if you remember we <pause dur="0.5"/> talked about the rationale of offences <pause dur="0.8"/> # in relation to other offences <pause dur="0.7"/> and # it's fairly easy to work out what the law is trying to achieve <pause dur="0.2"/> in relation to murder <pause dur="0.6"/> or rape or theft <pause dur="0.3"/> the objective is obvious <pause dur="1.1"/> what should the law try and achieve in relation to prostitution <pause dur="1.7"/> well <pause dur="0.4"/> i i think when much of our law was formulated <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> this issue may not have been addressed in precisely those terms <pause dur="1.0"/> however <pause dur="0.5"/> # there was a large scale <pause dur="0.2"/> review of the law <pause dur="0.9"/> # between <pause dur="0.4"/> nineteen-fifty-three and nineteen-fifty-seven <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> by a committee <pause dur="1.4"/> chaired by <pause dur="0.2"/> # a man called Lord Wolfenden <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> which had the job given the job by government <pause dur="0.5"/> of reviewing <pause dur="0.6"/> # the law relating to <pause dur="0.3"/> # homosexual offences <pause dur="0.2"/> and prostitution <pause dur="1.7"/> and # <pause dur="0.4"/> in order to review the law <pause dur="0.8"/> the Wolfenden committee <pause dur="0.6"/> started out by <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="1.3"/> trying to think about what the law should be

trying to achieve in this area <pause dur="1.0"/> # and it came up with a formula <pause dur="1.2"/> # which i've quoted on the sheet <pause dur="0.7"/> # but which i will read to you now <pause dur="1.1"/> Wolfenden said <pause dur="0.2"/> committee said <pause dur="0.5"/> # <reading>the role of the law should be to preserve <pause dur="0.2"/> public order and decency <pause dur="1.7"/> to protect citizens from what is indefensive or injurious <pause dur="0.9"/> and to provide sufficient safeguards <pause dur="0.2"/> against exploitation <pause dur="0.4"/> and corruption of others <pause dur="0.9"/> particularly <pause dur="0.4"/> those who are especially <pause dur="0.4"/> vulnerable <pause dur="0.5"/> because they are young in mind or body <pause dur="0.8"/> inexperienced <pause dur="0.9"/> or in a state of special <pause dur="0.5"/> physical <pause dur="0.4"/> official <pause dur="0.2"/> or economic <pause dur="0.9"/> dependence </reading> <pause dur="1.7"/> # the committee then went on and said <pause dur="0.6"/> <reading>it is not in our view <pause dur="0.4"/> the function of the law to intervene <pause dur="0.9"/> in the private lives of citizens <pause dur="0.6"/> or <pause dur="0.6"/> it is not the function of the law to seek to enforce <pause dur="0.5"/> any particular <pause dur="0.5"/> pattern of behaviour <pause dur="1.3"/> farther at least than it is necessary to carry out for the purposes we have outlined </reading> <pause dur="2.4"/> what is the committee saying there <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> and <pause dur="1.6"/> when we've worked out what the committee is saying can we sort of proceed from that <pause dur="0.5"/> to

work out what the law should be <pause dur="2.4"/> first of all they they they say <pause dur="1.0"/> it is the role of the law to preserve <pause dur="0.3"/> public order and decency <pause dur="2.0"/> and i think first of all the the reference to public order <pause dur="1.1"/> # indicates if you like that <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> the world can be divided up into public places <pause dur="0.5"/> which are shared <pause dur="0.8"/> by <pause dur="0.4"/> a number of us as citizens <pause dur="0.7"/> and <pause dur="0.4"/> private places which are occupied by us alone <pause dur="0.4"/> or those we choose to be with <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> i suppose the legal theory <pause dur="0.2"/> of the public place <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> which <pause dur="0.4"/> the Wolfenden committee expressed <pause dur="0.5"/> is that <pause dur="0.3"/> because the public place is shared <pause dur="0.8"/> # it's important that the <pause dur="0.2"/> use that any individual <pause dur="1.0"/> puts the public place to <pause dur="1.0"/> doesn't unnecessarily infringe <pause dur="0.7"/> on <pause dur="0.3"/> the way others <pause dur="0.5"/> wish to use the public place <pause dur="1.5"/> i suppose in relation to prostitution <pause dur="0.8"/> # the Wolfenden committee would be <pause dur="0.7"/> thinking about <pause dur="1.2"/> ways of # practising prostitution which are carried in public <pause dur="0.7"/> soliciting particularly on the street <pause dur="1.1"/> and <pause dur="0.5"/> when the Wolfenden committee talked about preserving <pause dur="0.2"/> public order and decency <pause dur="1.0"/> # they were probably

saying well <pause dur="2.3"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> soliciting in a public place has some impact <pause dur="0.4"/> on those around <pause dur="0.7"/> # other people mightn't want to see it they might consider it indecent <pause dur="0.8"/> # that might be a good reason for criminalizing <pause dur="0.6"/> soliciting for prostitution in public <pause dur="0.5"/> because <pause dur="0.4"/> public space has to be shared <pause dur="2.1"/> the other side of the coin of course to the notion of a public place <pause dur="0.6"/> # is <pause dur="0.3"/> private place <pause dur="0.9"/> and # <pause dur="1.4"/> if i just <pause dur="0.2"/> jump to the end of the quote from Wolfenden <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> the committee said that <pause dur="0.7"/> it's not the function of the law to intervene in the private lives of citizens <pause dur="0.7"/> or to enforce any particular <pause dur="0.4"/> code of conduct <pause dur="1.0"/> the committee seems to be saying okay <pause dur="0.2"/> in public you've got <pause dur="0.2"/> to act in a way that keeps everybody else happy <pause dur="0.5"/> but there is a private sphere <pause dur="1.4"/> within the private sphere the law should respect autonomy <pause dur="0.5"/> shouldn't try and enforce some code about what should or shouldn't be <pause dur="0.5"/> done <pause dur="0.7"/> develop a sphere in which you can make your own decisions <pause dur="2.1"/> # <pause dur="2.9"/> if we go back to the the <pause dur="0.4"/> key # the core of the quote rather <pause dur="0.6"/> we find

that <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> the Wolfenden committee were <pause dur="0.8"/> concerned about providing sufficient <pause dur="0.3"/> safeguards against exploitation and <pause dur="0.2"/> corruption of others <pause dur="3.2"/> now <pause dur="0.2"/> those words are loaded aren't they <pause dur="0.2"/> exploitation and corruption they sound bad <pause dur="1.0"/> # if i went out into the streets in <gap reason="name" extent="1 word"/> today and i said <pause dur="0.3"/> should the law try and prevent exploitation and corruption <pause dur="0.6"/> people would probably say <pause dur="0.2"/> yes <pause dur="1.7"/> they are very problematic notions though <pause dur="0.5"/> # particularly <pause dur="0.7"/> when we think about them in terms of <pause dur="1.0"/> the Wolfenden committee's other comments <pause dur="1.5"/> what does exploitation mean <pause dur="0.2"/> i suppose exploitation means using <pause dur="0.6"/> somebody else <pause dur="0.5"/> for some purpose of your own <pause dur="1.7"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> but of course <pause dur="0.7"/> exploitation in that sense occurs all the time doesn't it <pause dur="0.5"/> # you're exploiting me <pause dur="0.4"/> because <pause dur="0.8"/> managing to stay awake during this lecture <pause dur="0.8"/> writing lots of notes <pause dur="0.4"/> repeating it all in the exam is a necessary stage <pause dur="0.4"/> to you getting that much desired <pause dur="0.3"/> B-M-W and stripy suit in a few years' time <pause dur="0.9"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="3"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> so you are exploiting me the university's exploiting me <pause dur="0.3"/> # by

employing me <pause dur="0.6"/> # i exploit <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> i suppose you could say i exploit <pause dur="1.3"/> whoever it is who cooks my <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>food <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/><pause dur="0.7"/> # or or i exploit the person who <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> shears the sheep in New Zealand or something to provide the jumper <pause dur="0.4"/> <unclear>jumper i wear</unclear> <pause dur="1.3"/> <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> whatever <pause dur="0.4"/> so exploitation happens all the time and in fact it's just # <pause dur="0.5"/> an aspect of modern society isn't it <pause dur="0.6"/> the whole idea of society is we live together <pause dur="0.3"/> we interact react we complement each other in the functions we perform <pause dur="0.6"/> you can call it <pause dur="0.5"/> mutual exploitation <pause dur="0.9"/> but it's also a normal aspect of modern society <pause dur="1.4"/> so exploitation is problematic <pause dur="0.9"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> in relation to prostitution <pause dur="0.8"/> is it really clear who exploits who <pause dur="1.5"/> well <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> some people would argue that the male customers exploit <pause dur="0.3"/> # the woman who provides <pause dur="0.4"/> the prostitution services <pause dur="1.2"/> if however <pause dur="0.3"/> # you look at <pause dur="1.5"/> some <pause dur="0.2"/> # feminist analyses of prostitution <pause dur="0.9"/> they would disagree with this <pause dur="0.8"/> # if you look at # a book <pause dur="0.2"/> called Working Women by Arlene Macleod <pause dur="0.9"/> # <pause dur="1.1"/> when she was at this university <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="1.6"/> she talked to <trunc>prostitutio</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> prostitutes and

prostitutes say <pause dur="0.6"/> oh we're in this job because we like it <pause dur="0.7"/> # it's by far the most satisfactory way for us <pause dur="0.3"/> to earn a living <pause dur="0.4"/> to make a reasonable amount of money <pause dur="0.4"/> to keep control of our own lives <pause dur="0.3"/> and to have the sort of flexible lifestyle we want <pause dur="0.6"/> <unclear>if you ever</unclear> ask prostitutes why they do the job they're not admitting to being exploited very often <pause dur="0.6"/> many of them it's just a rational <pause dur="0.3"/> choice <pause dur="0.4"/> # according to the options available to them <pause dur="1.6"/> # so it's not absolutely clear that the male customer exploits the woman <pause dur="0.8"/> and indeed <pause dur="0.2"/> # you might say it's the other way round <pause dur="0.8"/> # if you look at the areas where prostitution is <pause dur="0.2"/> is carried out you may say well <pause dur="0.6"/> here's the man gone for a drink after work on his way home <pause dur="1.1"/> # he's presented with a temptation <pause dur="0.6"/> # is that the woman exploiting him <pause dur="0.5"/> so exploitation is a problematic concept <pause dur="1.7"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> exploitation can also be seen <pause dur="0.5"/> # in the relationship <pause dur="0.7"/> between <pause dur="0.2"/> the <pause dur="0.4"/> so-called <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> pimp or ponce <pause dur="0.8"/> who is a sort of stereotypical <pause dur="0.7"/> figure <pause dur="0.4"/> # the man who lives off the earnings of

prostitution <pause dur="1.2"/> and # <pause dur="0.4"/> if one went further through the Wolfenden committee report <pause dur="0.8"/> # you would see that <pause dur="0.2"/> that committee did think it appropriate <pause dur="0.8"/> to maintain <pause dur="0.2"/> penalties <pause dur="0.2"/> on <pause dur="1.0"/> # men who lived <pause dur="0.4"/> off <pause dur="0.3"/> the money women made by prostitution <pause dur="1.9"/> if you like the the man figure was seen as an exploiter <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> but again that is rather problematic isn't it <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> all of us who earn money <pause dur="0.6"/> # well for many of us who earn money <pause dur="0.5"/> # we choose to support somebody else <pause dur="0.7"/> very common for <pause dur="0.6"/> # husbands <pause dur="0.7"/> or wives to support their partners isn't it <pause dur="0.5"/> where one person in the family works <pause dur="0.7"/> certainly <pause dur="0.3"/> common for adults to support <pause dur="0.6"/> # <trunc>fo</trunc> <trunc>fo</trunc> for parents to support grown up children <pause dur="0.8"/> so <pause dur="0.9"/> # we don't say oh well there's exploitation in this relationship just because one person who earns money <pause dur="0.9"/> pays the expenses of <pause dur="0.3"/> the family or or the couple <pause dur="1.8"/> the problem # exploitation then is problematic <pause dur="1.2"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> it's also true when we come to look at the law relating to <pause dur="0.2"/> # living off the earnings of prostitution <pause dur="0.7"/> that <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> the offence of living off can be

<trunc>provi</trunc> # can be committed <pause dur="0.8"/> where a person who receives money from the prostitute <pause dur="0.7"/> provides <pause dur="0.2"/> some sort of service <pause dur="1.2"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> modern prostitution may be committed <pause dur="0.7"/> through # massage parlours <pause dur="0.9"/> or escort agencies <pause dur="1.6"/> both sorts of organization may be fronts for prostitution <pause dur="1.2"/> # the people who <pause dur="0.6"/> organize those <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> those # <pause dur="0.5"/> businesses <pause dur="1.0"/> can be found guilty of living off the earnings of prostitution <pause dur="1.3"/> # but are they exploiters <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.6"/> certainly many would argue that they're not <pause dur="0.6"/> they're providing <pause dur="0.2"/> necessary <pause dur="0.5"/> ancillary business services <pause dur="1.0"/> in order to allow a prostitute to <pause dur="0.4"/> carry out <pause dur="0.5"/> her or his business <pause dur="0.6"/> # in a way which is <pause dur="0.4"/> safe <pause dur="0.2"/> and makes <pause dur="0.2"/> # business sense makes commercial sense <pause dur="1.1"/> so again <pause dur="0.9"/> exploitation is a tricky concept isn't it <pause dur="2.2"/> # <pause dur="1.1"/> corruption's a tricky concept as well <pause dur="1.4"/> i think the <pause dur="0.3"/> the essence of corruption <pause dur="1.2"/> # is <pause dur="0.9"/> # exerting an influence on somebody <pause dur="0.5"/> which in some <pause dur="0.2"/> way <pause dur="0.5"/> degrades them <pause dur="0.8"/> or makes them <pause dur="0.2"/> worse <pause dur="2.0"/> # <pause dur="0.6"/> and i suppose here the Wolfenden committee when they when they said the law should deal with corruption <pause dur="1.4"/> # was probably

concerned with <pause dur="0.9"/> # an individual who might <pause dur="0.8"/> recruit <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> others into prostitution <pause dur="0.9"/> persuade them perhaps with <pause dur="0.2"/> offer of high earning <pause dur="1.2"/> # or a glamorous lifestyle or whatever to <pause dur="0.5"/> take part in prostitution <pause dur="2.5"/> well <pause dur="1.7"/> # again i think many people have a sort of gut reaction that that is a bad thing to do <pause dur="0.8"/> there is a problem though which is this that <pause dur="1.0"/> we can only call that corruption <pause dur="0.9"/> if we say that <pause dur="0.3"/> the non-prostitute lifestyle is fine <pause dur="1.8"/> and the prostitute lifestyle is in some way bad or degraded <pause dur="1.1"/> we're talking about corruption we're talking about an <trunc>in</trunc> an influence making something worse or degrading them <pause dur="0.9"/> so <pause dur="0.3"/> we must be making a value judgement mustn't we that <pause dur="0.5"/> you're a young person <pause dur="0.2"/> coming to university that's fine <pause dur="0.8"/> if somebody persuades you to go and work as a prostitute to earn money <pause dur="0.2"/> to support your university career in some way you've been degraded <pause dur="1.8"/> and of course once you make that value judgement <pause dur="0.6"/> # aren't you infringing <pause dur="1.0"/> one of the <pause dur="0.3"/> Wolfenden committee's later principles <pause dur="0.7"/> which is

that <pause dur="0.6"/> # the law should not <pause dur="0.2"/> seek to enforce <pause dur="0.5"/> any particular <pause dur="0.2"/> pattern of behaviour <pause dur="1.5"/> or <pause dur="0.6"/> are you also infringing <pause dur="0.3"/> the Wolfenden committee principle <pause dur="0.8"/> that <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> there should be an area of <pause dur="0.9"/> private <pause dur="0.2"/> life <pause dur="0.7"/> in which the law should play no role <pause dur="2.0"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> as i said when we talk about <pause dur="0.7"/> saying <pause dur="0.2"/> there's an area a private sphere in which the law should not <pause dur="0.6"/> # <trunc>i</trunc> <trunc>i</trunc> <pause dur="0.4"/> in which the law should not involve itself <pause dur="0.3"/> we're really talking about protecting autonomy <pause dur="0.7"/> and autonomy <pause dur="0.4"/> means <unclear>though</unclear> <pause dur="0.2"/> the right and ability <pause dur="0.4"/> to make your own choices <pause dur="0.7"/> about how you lead your life <pause dur="1.8"/> so it's very difficult to square this notion of preventing corruption <pause dur="0.7"/> with this idea of letting individuals ultimately make their own choices <pause dur="1.3"/> # <pause dur="0.9"/> at the end of the day i suppose <pause dur="0.6"/> if autonomy is to be <pause dur="0.8"/> real and valuable <pause dur="1.0"/> it must be <pause dur="0.7"/> autonomy which allows you to make bad choices as well as good choices <pause dur="1.1"/> mustn't it <pause dur="0.9"/> that's the whole point of autonomy it is up to you <pause dur="0.8"/> the the one right you <pause dur="0.2"/> you <pause dur="0.2"/> the essential right you have to make your own choices about your own

life <pause dur="0.9"/> it would be very strange if you said oh you've got autonomy <pause dur="0.9"/> as long as you make the right choices <pause dur="0.4"/> if you start to decide to do anything bad oh no <pause dur="0.4"/> then you lose your autonomy that's not autonomy at all is it it's a sham <pause dur="2.0"/> well <pause dur="0.2"/> that's a brief introduction to the <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="1.5"/> to the # philosophical underpinnings of our current law <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.6"/> as we'll see when we go through the law <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="1.0"/> some of these contradictions which i've suggested become <pause dur="0.2"/> more and more apparent <pause dur="2.1"/> let's move on and talk about <pause dur="1.1"/> what is <pause dur="0.2"/> a prostitute <pause dur="3.1"/> rather interesting isn't it that <pause dur="1.2"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> if <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> anything is to be <pause dur="0.2"/> the subject of law <pause dur="1.3"/> if it is to be something that the law <pause dur="0.2"/> deals with <pause dur="1.5"/> # it must be possible to define it <pause dur="2.9"/> and <pause dur="0.9"/> if we are going to have laws <pause dur="0.5"/> relating to prostitution <pause dur="1.3"/> # which distinguish <pause dur="0.7"/> # a prostitute from other people <pause dur="0.6"/> and treat a prostitute differently from other people <pause dur="1.4"/> we do need a some <pause dur="0.6"/> satisfying reason for that we we've got to have a reason for treating a prostitute differently haven't we <pause dur="1.1"/> and that suggests that <pause dur="0.4"/>

we must be able to create a definition of prostitution <pause dur="1.2"/> and a definition of prostitute <pause dur="0.3"/> that distinguishes <pause dur="1.1"/> the prostitute <pause dur="0.8"/> and his or her practice <pause dur="0.6"/> from <pause dur="0.7"/> the conduct of other members of society <pause dur="0.9"/> which is <pause dur="0.6"/> approved of or at least <pause dur="0.2"/> tolerated <pause dur="1.1"/> yeah <pause dur="0.7"/> if we're going to have criminal law relating to prostitution <pause dur="0.5"/> there must be some way of defining prostitution that makes it different <pause dur="0.6"/> from <pause dur="0.2"/> the run of ordinary conduct <pause dur="0.7"/> let's have a quick look at what the law says about the definition of prostitution <pause dur="1.0"/> and i'm going to look at # <pause dur="0.5"/> a run of four cases <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> all of the references to <trunc>the</trunc> these will be found on your handout <pause dur="1.1"/> which will # <pause dur="0.6"/> arrive in due course <pause dur="0.8"/> i wonder if it really will be delivered here <pause dur="1.7"/> maybe not who knows <pause dur="1.0"/> # first case was a case in nineteen-eighteen <pause dur="0.2"/> called <pause dur="0.2"/> De Monk <pause dur="1.2"/> De Monk nineteen-eighteen <pause dur="1.3"/> # <pause dur="2.3"/> this case # concerned # <pause dur="0.2"/> a <pause dur="0.9"/> prosecution of # <pause dur="0.2"/> a lady <pause dur="1.8"/> # who <pause dur="0.5"/> was <trunc>ch</trunc> charged <vocal desc="clears throat" iterated="n"/> <pause dur="0.2"/> with an old offence <pause dur="1.1"/> of # <pause dur="0.6"/> encouraging <pause dur="0.6"/> the prostitution <pause dur="0.8"/> of # somebody else <pause dur="0.6"/> so so she was charged with

encouraging <pause dur="0.5"/> prostitution <pause dur="1.9"/> and # <pause dur="0.3"/> the evidence against the defendant <pause dur="0.2"/> was quite simple <pause dur="1.1"/> # the defendant was the mother of a fourteen year old girl <pause dur="1.9"/> and she in return for money <pause dur="1.1"/> had allowed <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> a male visitor <pause dur="0.9"/> to their home <pause dur="0.8"/> to spend some time <pause dur="0.8"/> # with this girl <pause dur="0.2"/> in an upstairs bedroom <pause dur="1.1"/> that was the evidence <pause dur="0.8"/> money changed hands <pause dur="0.6"/> male visitor just allowed to go to an upstairs room with a fourteen year old girl <pause dur="1.1"/> # nobody's saying what went on <pause dur="0.2"/> up there <pause dur="1.2"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> in <pause dur="0.6"/> her defence <pause dur="0.9"/> # the mother <pause dur="0.2"/> had the girl medically examined <pause dur="0.9"/> # and medical evidence suggested that the girl was a virgin <pause dur="0.4"/> who apparently had not had full sexual intercourse <pause dur="1.9"/> so the argument was <pause dur="1.3"/> prostitution is surely about selling <pause dur="0.5"/> the act of sex <pause dur="1.4"/> this young child apparently hasn't had sex <pause dur="1.0"/> sex can't have taken place <pause dur="0.7"/> therefore there cannot have been an act of prostitution <pause dur="1.9"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> the court dismissed that argument <pause dur="1.5"/> # and they said this <pause dur="1.3"/> they said <pause dur="0.2"/> <reading>prostitution is proved <pause dur="0.7"/> if it is shown that the woman offers offers her body <pause dur="0.5"/> commonly <pause dur="0.7"/> for acts of

lewdness <pause dur="1.1"/> for payment in <pause dur="0.2"/> return </reading> <pause dur="2.0"/> i should say mysteriously that the the phrase acts of <trunc>lew</trunc> lewdness <trunc>L-E</trunc> <pause dur="0.4"/> L-E-W-D-N-E-S-S <pause dur="0.5"/> seems to have been missed off the sheet but it it should be there <pause dur="0.9"/> # <pause dur="1.2"/> what they were saying was that <pause dur="0.6"/> i suppose the court was satisfied that this bloke wasn't going up to this upstairs room with this young girl <pause dur="0.6"/> # to look at her stamp collection <pause dur="0.6"/> and as as long as the court was satisfied that some sort of <pause dur="0.3"/> lewd sexual activity took place <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> that could be prostitution even if there was not full <pause dur="0.2"/> sexual intercourse <pause dur="2.1"/> # <pause dur="3.3"/> there's a problem here isn't there <pause dur="1.9"/> on the one hand <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> i'm i'm sure we all recognize there are many different ways of <pause dur="0.5"/> getting sexual gratification <pause dur="0.8"/> # and indeed <pause dur="1.0"/> in relation to youngsters of that sort of age there are many acts which <pause dur="0.4"/> would be considered an indecent assault on a fourteen year old <pause dur="0.6"/> if committed by somebody else <pause dur="1.9"/> but <pause dur="0.5"/> if you move away from the sort of bedrock of sexual intercourse there is a question well <pause dur="0.7"/> what is an act of lewdness for

sexual gratification <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> we seem to be defining the act of prostitution according to <pause dur="0.5"/> # one's motives <pause dur="0.6"/> according to <pause dur="0.8"/> what sort of feelings one has in relation to an act <pause dur="0.9"/> but it does become a bit tricky doesn't it <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> i i've often puzzled if there's any difference between <pause dur="0.7"/> sexual and other pleasures <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="2.3"/> <trunc>pe</trunc> people like to have bodily contact in various ways don't they <pause dur="0.2"/> # and enjoy it <pause dur="0.6"/> and what about rugby players getting involved in a rugby scrum <pause dur="0.7"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="2"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> they may or may not get some sort of pleasure from <pause dur="0.5"/> <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="2"/> just the sort of of <pause dur="0.7"/> closeness and camaraderie and sweat of a rugby scrum <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="1.6"/> who's to say what <trunc>i</trunc> <pause dur="0.3"/> if that gratification is in any way <pause dur="0.4"/> different from other types of pleasure <pause dur="0.5"/> to sexual <pause dur="0.5"/> there are people who like to # <pause dur="0.4"/> dress up in nappies and <pause dur="0.3"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> be given # <pause dur="0.2"/> baths by <pause dur="0.2"/> persons who pretend to be nannies and things now <pause dur="0.9"/> # for some reason or other we consider that to be a form of sexual gratification but <pause dur="0.2"/> is it really <pause dur="0.2"/> is it <pause dur="0.4"/> or or is it really just a

gratification of some other need <pause dur="1.1"/> it's hard to say isn't it <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.9"/> you know if you go for a <pause dur="0.3"/> an ordinary straightforward massage in order to cure your aching <pause dur="0.6"/> muscles <pause dur="0.3"/> you may find that very <pause dur="0.2"/> enjoyable and relaxing <pause dur="0.2"/> is that <trunc>i</trunc> <pause dur="0.5"/> is that clearly different from <pause dur="0.5"/> other sorts of behaviour you might commit that <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> indulge in with a partner <pause dur="0.4"/> which might be identified as sexual <pause dur="0.4"/> it's tricky isn't it <pause dur="1.7"/> # <pause dur="1.7"/> if we have moved away from sexual intercourse <pause dur="0.7"/> # of course <pause dur="1.5"/> we may of course # as as well <pause dur="0.2"/> question well what the <trunc>l</trunc> what's the law all about <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> one possible <pause dur="0.8"/> # rationale for the laws relating to prostitution <pause dur="0.5"/> which have been offered <pause dur="0.5"/> # focus very much on the sexual act <pause dur="0.9"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> one argument <pause dur="1.1"/> sometimes put by # <trunc>reli</trunc> religious bodies is that <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="1.3"/> sex is something which should be <pause dur="0.5"/> # indulged in in a a relationship <pause dur="0.8"/> linked to the raising of a family <pause dur="0.7"/> # linked to the # <pause dur="0.2"/> exchange of love between parties <pause dur="0.6"/> and that <pause dur="1.3"/> prostitution degrades that <pause dur="0.8"/> # sort of sacred relationship <pause dur="0.6"/> by <pause dur="0.7"/> putting a price on it <pause dur="0.8"/> they also <pause dur="0.4"/> degrade

particular <pause dur="0.4"/> relationships <pause dur="0.4"/> because the effect of having prostitution around <pause dur="0.4"/> may be to tempt <pause dur="0.7"/> one of the parties to a <pause dur="0.8"/> sort of pukka loving relationship to stray and to be disloyal <pause dur="2.0"/> but <pause dur="0.9"/> if the if if the reason for outlawing prostitution focuses on some sort of sacred notion of the sex act <pause dur="0.7"/> then why extend prostitution to other sorts of <pause dur="0.6"/> quasi-sexual behaviour <pause dur="0.7"/> there's a question there isn't there <pause dur="1.6"/> okay let's move on <pause dur="0.9"/> let's # <pause dur="0.7"/> jump fifty years or so <pause dur="0.6"/> to a case called Webb in nineteen-sixty-four <pause dur="2.6"/> # <pause dur="0.9"/> what happened in Webb was that # <pause dur="3.3"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> there was # an attempt <pause dur="0.2"/> to <pause dur="1.2"/> # entrap <pause dur="1.9"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> some # <pause dur="0.8"/> people who were running a # massage parlour <pause dur="1.6"/> and # <pause dur="1.8"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> a <trunc>p</trunc> police officer went to the massage parlour <pause dur="0.8"/> and # at the massage parlour he was offered <pause dur="0.9"/> # <pause dur="0.9"/> sexual services <pause dur="0.6"/> in the way of masturbation <pause dur="1.8"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> in the # time-honoured fashion the police officer made his excuses and left <pause dur="1.2"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> # <pause dur="0.6"/> but then a a prosecution was brought <pause dur="0.4"/> against the <pause dur="0.7"/> # proprietor of the massage parlour <pause dur="1.5"/> # <trunc>real</trunc> <trunc>i</trunc> <trunc>i</trunc> <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> for # i think # keeping

a brothel <pause dur="0.9"/> and of course you can only keep a brothel we'll look at the offence later on <pause dur="0.4"/> if it's premises where prostitution is practised <pause dur="0.9"/> the big question in the Webb case was <pause dur="0.9"/> you've got premises <pause dur="0.9"/> masturbation for money takes place there <pause dur="0.6"/> does that amount to <trunc>pros</trunc> <pause dur="0.2"/> to <trunc>pros</trunc> <pause dur="0.6"/> to prostitution <pause dur="1.7"/> well <pause dur="0.8"/> # obviously <pause dur="1.3"/> on the basis of the case we've already looked at <pause dur="0.2"/> the case of De Monk <pause dur="0.8"/> # it doesn't have to be absolute sex <pause dur="0.4"/> but other acts of lewdness would do <pause dur="1.3"/> and i suppose <pause dur="0.9"/> masturbation's pretty lewd </u><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/> <u who="nm1157" trans="pause"> okay so so the fact that it <pause dur="0.2"/> that that it was <pause dur="0.4"/> something other than sexual intercourse wasn't a defence in this case <pause dur="0.6"/> the defendants however went a little bit further and they said well <pause dur="0.5"/> # the nature of masturbation is something that the woman does to the man <pause dur="1.0"/> it's not a case of the woman offering <pause dur="0.2"/> her body <pause dur="0.7"/> for acts of sexual gratification <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> rather <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="1.0"/> you know it's not the man doing something to her <trunc>a</trunc> as apparently De Monk <pause dur="0.5"/> it's the man who's passive and she's

doing something to the man they suggested that made a difference <pause dur="1.0"/> well <pause dur="1.3"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> Lord Parker the # Lord Chief Justice and indeed that's what L-C-J means Lord Chief Justice <pause dur="0.8"/> # got rather carried away in dealing with this case he said # <pause dur="0.8"/><vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="2"/> <reading>prostitution includes offering to participate <pause dur="0.4"/> in physical acts of indecency <pause dur="0.5"/> for sexual gratification of <pause dur="0.2"/> men <pause dur="0.6"/> it cannot matter </reading> he said <reading>whether she whips the man <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="4"/> or the man whips her <pause dur="0.6"/> it cannot matter </reading> et cetera <pause dur="0.5"/> now the funny thing about this is that there was no question of anybody whipping anybody <pause dur="1.0"/> <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="5"/> so # <pause dur="1.1"/> this little quote i'm afraid # <pause dur="0.8"/> # <trunc>in</trunc> indicates more about what was going on in <pause dur="0.3"/> good old Lord Parker's mind at the time <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="3"/> rather <pause dur="0.5"/> than the facts of the case <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.6"/> but <pause dur="0.2"/> again what he's really saying is that <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> <trunc>i</trunc> it doesn't matter who does what to whom as long long as there is some

sexual act <pause dur="1.7"/> and again that does lead us to to question <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="2.3"/> what what is <pause dur="0.4"/> what is it about prostitution we don't like <pause dur="0.7"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> for <pause dur="0.9"/> people who've argued that prostitution is exploitative <pause dur="1.0"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> i think <trunc>w</trunc> one of the <pause dur="1.0"/> one of the strands of the argument is that <pause dur="0.6"/> the woman is in some way violated in the act of prostitution for money <pause dur="1.3"/> clearly if <pause dur="0.2"/> if the <trunc>w</trunc> if the woman <pause dur="0.3"/> does the act to the man there's really no violation of her in that is there <pause dur="0.9"/> # and again <pause dur="0.2"/> we begin to slide away from <pause dur="1.4"/> the the bedrock of of <pause dur="0.6"/> make it <trunc>be</trunc> it being clear <pause dur="0.2"/> why we # in some way <pause dur="0.2"/> prohibit prostitution <pause dur="1.0"/> well i'll tell you what let me stop there for # a handout dishing out interlude <pause dur="0.6"/> and i'll i'll <trunc>apo</trunc> apologize to our cameraman <gap reason="name" extent="1 word"/> for # <pause dur="0.2"/> breaking things up is that all right <gap reason="name" extent="1 word"/> </u><gap reason="break in recording" extent="uncertain"/> <u who="nm1157" trans="pause"> okay two handouts gone round <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> the orange and the # yellow <pause dur="0.2"/> the yellow relates to today's lecture <pause dur="0.6"/> there's a <pause dur="0.2"/> a third handout which is called <gap reason="name" extent="1 word"/> <pause dur="0.2"/> Criminal Statutes <pause dur="0.6"/> # instead of dishing those out there's a box of

them <pause dur="0.8"/> # that is a white <pause dur="0.7"/> quite thick document <pause dur="0.3"/> there's one by each of the exit doors <pause dur="0.7"/> # if you could grab one as you go out that would be handy and i will put # if anybody doesn't get one i'll put the pile in the law school <pause dur="0.2"/> okay so <pause dur="0.5"/> grab the statutes as you leave <pause dur="2.3"/> right <pause dur="0.2"/> we were talking about the definition of prostitution <pause dur="1.6"/> # <pause dur="1.8"/> the <pause dur="1.6"/> definition has been further considered <pause dur="1.9"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> in a couple of recent cases <pause dur="0.8"/> # first of all for the case of McFarland in nineteen-ninety-four <pause dur="1.3"/> # <pause dur="2.4"/> this case concerned <pause dur="1.2"/> # somebody who was pretending to be a prostitute <pause dur="0.4"/> in order to obtain money by deception <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> fairly common that # <pause dur="1.2"/> to to for for women who are involved in prostitution or their accomplices to <pause dur="0.6"/> # use a promise of prostitution as a way of obtaining <pause dur="0.5"/> money from <pause dur="0.4"/> # gullible customers <pause dur="0.9"/> # it's rather a safe # <pause dur="0.3"/> area in which to obtain money of course because <pause dur="0.6"/> # you would need a bit of nerve to go and stand at the <trunc>st</trunc> counter at the police station and say well <pause dur="0.4"/> # # <pause dur="0.4"/> this bloke met me in a club and said would you <trunc>m</trunc>

like to meet # a girl for a hundred pounds and i said yes and <pause dur="0.6"/> i handed over the money and then <pause dur="0.3"/> nothing happened you know <pause dur="0.5"/> people tend to # not want to admit to the police that they resort to prostitutes <pause dur="1.0"/> # however in this case <pause dur="1.1"/> # i think probably by entrapment <pause dur="0.6"/> # it became apparent that <pause dur="0.2"/> # there was a scam <pause dur="0.7"/> whereby <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="1.1"/> # a woman <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.7"/> pretended to be offering herself for active prostitution <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> once she'd obtained money from her customers <pause dur="0.3"/> she would then disappear <pause dur="0.3"/> out of a side door <pause dur="0.6"/> # and no act of <pause dur="0.2"/> no act of <trunc>sexu</trunc> <trunc>wo</trunc> whatever would take place <pause dur="1.6"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> the question arose in this case whether <pause dur="0.2"/> what she did <pause dur="0.9"/> # could be considered an act of prostitution <pause dur="0.9"/> apparently offering <pause dur="0.5"/> herself for sexual services for money <pause dur="1.3"/> even though <pause dur="0.2"/> # there was no intention on her part <pause dur="0.3"/> to carry out such sexual services <pause dur="1.4"/> # the court <pause dur="0.5"/> # said yes this could amount to prostitution <pause dur="1.6"/> and they said # <pause dur="0.2"/> the definition of prostitution <pause dur="0.4"/> refers to a woman who offers sexual services <pause dur="1.1"/> in return for money <pause dur="0.8"/> indeed that

terminology had been used in the earlier cases <pause dur="0.8"/> # and <pause dur="0.8"/> they said that # <pause dur="0.4"/> the offer <pause dur="0.4"/> was not dependent <pause dur="0.4"/> upon any intention <pause dur="0.5"/> to carry out <pause dur="0.7"/> the act <pause dur="1.1"/> well <pause dur="1.0"/> i suppose <pause dur="0.2"/> this case is rather puzzling <pause dur="1.4"/> whereas <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> the sort of simple broad question <pause dur="1.2"/> should this sort of behaviour be criminalized <pause dur="1.1"/> pretending to offer sexual services in order to obtain money <pause dur="0.8"/> # maybe most people would say yes or some people might say well it's the <pause dur="0.4"/> customer's own silly fault <pause dur="0.4"/> but but either way we can see some reason for criminalizing this conduct <pause dur="1.4"/> whether however this conduct should be <pause dur="0.4"/> categorized as <pause dur="0.6"/> # prostitution and criminal on that ground <pause dur="0.6"/> rather than deception <pause dur="0.9"/> # an offence <pause dur="0.5"/> normally seen as protecting personal property <pause dur="0.7"/> is another matter <pause dur="0.9"/> # <pause dur="1.5"/> i think <pause dur="0.2"/> to some extent the court was influenced <pause dur="0.2"/> by <pause dur="0.6"/> # <pause dur="1.2"/> the sorts of offences that <pause dur="0.4"/> may be committed in relation to prostitution <pause dur="0.9"/> # as we shall see <pause dur="0.7"/> # the most visible <pause dur="0.3"/> offence relating to prostitution <pause dur="0.5"/> # relates to loitering <pause dur="0.4"/> or soliciting <pause dur="0.6"/> on the street <pause dur="1.2"/> # and i

suppose the court might well have been <pause dur="0.8"/> mindful <pause dur="0.7"/> that <pause dur="0.3"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> if they said well <pause dur="1.3"/> it's # <pause dur="0.2"/> you're not a prostitute <pause dur="0.7"/> if you never intend to go through with the act <pause dur="0.4"/> might provide a rather easy excuse <pause dur="0.4"/> to women who are picked up <pause dur="0.4"/> loitering or soliciting <pause dur="1.1"/> rather strange if a woman was picked up on the street for this offence and she said <pause dur="0.3"/> oh no oh i'm not going to have sex with these people i'm just trying to rip them off <pause dur="0.9"/> <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="1"/> # <pause dur="0.6"/> to some extent i think the court may have been influenced in extending the definition of prostitution <pause dur="0.5"/> # by that <pause dur="0.3"/> need to try and prevent an easy loophole <pause dur="0.2"/> or an easy way out <pause dur="1.9"/> # finally # we come to a case called # <pause dur="0.2"/> D-P-P which of course means Director of Public Prosecutions <pause dur="1.3"/> # <pause dur="0.6"/> against <pause dur="0.3"/> Thaw <pause dur="0.3"/> in nineteen-ninety-four <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="1.0"/> the defendant in this case <pause dur="1.8"/> was a man <pause dur="1.8"/> hanging around <pause dur="1.9"/> trying perhaps to persuade people to have some form of sex with him <pause dur="0.3"/> for money <pause dur="1.1"/> and he was charged <pause dur="0.2"/> with <pause dur="0.2"/> the offence i've just mentioned <pause dur="0.7"/> of loitering or soliciting <pause dur="0.6"/> in

a public place <pause dur="0.4"/> for the purpose of prostitution <pause dur="1.5"/> got to the magistrates' court and # <pause dur="1.3"/> the chairman of the bench looked over <pause dur="0.5"/> his spectacles at this person in the dock and said <pause dur="1.4"/> that's not a prostitute <pause dur="0.6"/> that's a man <pause dur="0.8"/> <vocal desc="laughter" iterated="y" n="ss" dur="3"/> case dismissed <pause dur="1.8"/> # <pause dur="1.0"/> well the the prosecutor <pause dur="0.9"/> the <trunc>s</trunc> Crown prosecutor was rather <pause dur="1.0"/> # rather unhappy about this <pause dur="0.2"/> <shift feature="voice" new="laugh"/>gone <shift feature="voice" new="normal"/>to all the trouble of arresting this person <pause dur="1.4"/> taken a statement all that lot brought them to court <pause dur="0.3"/> got the Crown prosecutor there and the <pause dur="0.4"/> case was chucked out just on the <pause dur="0.4"/> the basis of the <pause dur="0.2"/> defendant's gender <pause dur="0.9"/> so # the <trunc>c</trunc> the case went to the divisional court <pause dur="0.8"/> that's the case the the the court that hears <pause dur="0.6"/> appeals on questions of law from the magistrates' court <pause dur="1.5"/> # and indeed the divisional court confirmed <pause dur="0.5"/> # that the magistrate had been quite right <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="0.8"/> the # divisional court looked at the statute <pause dur="1.1"/> # they looked at the report of the Wolfenden committee that had proposed <pause dur="0.8"/> a reformulation of the loitering and soliciting offence <pause dur="0.8"/> and they said

that <pause dur="0.8"/> clearly the term <pause dur="0.3"/> common prostitute <pause dur="0.4"/> is supposed <pause dur="0.2"/> to refer to women <pause dur="1.1"/> # <pause dur="1.1"/> and they said it was clearly the intention of the Wolfenden committee <pause dur="0.6"/> who proposed the reformulation of the offence <pause dur="0.6"/> that # it should be <pause dur="0.3"/> the nuisance caused by women <pause dur="0.9"/> # which should be the object of the offence <pause dur="2.1"/> well <pause dur="0.6"/> what could we say about this <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="1.4"/> i suppose a <trunc>s</trunc> simple <pause dur="0.3"/> # very <pause dur="1.1"/> crude comment might be <pause dur="1.3"/> # the law seems to more concerned with <pause dur="0.6"/> stereotypes <pause dur="0.6"/> rather than <pause dur="0.2"/> conduct <pause dur="3.1"/> if we go back to my early lectures when we <pause dur="0.3"/> talked about <pause dur="0.9"/> an objective of the of the criminal law to avoid harm <pause dur="1.5"/> # it's true isn't it that <pause dur="1.5"/> if <pause dur="0.8"/> a particular sort of conduct can be said to be harmful in some way <pause dur="0.6"/> it's rarely going to make much difference whether the conduct is committed by a man or a woman <pause dur="1.5"/> # or indeed by any other sort of different categorizations of the human race you might use <pause dur="1.2"/> i mean either the conduct's harmful or it's not <pause dur="1.1"/> and you might say the same about <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.5"/> loitering in the street for prostitution <pause dur="1.0"/> # if loitering

in the street or <pause dur="0.3"/> soliciting in the street is something which we as a community <pause dur="0.3"/> don't like to see <pause dur="0.5"/> which we think degrades our public places <pause dur="0.7"/> we find indecent <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.9"/> surely it's going to do so whether or not whether it's a # a woman who who does it or a man or a group of women or a group of men <pause dur="1.8"/> # <pause dur="0.3"/> so <pause dur="0.2"/> that's very strange <pause dur="0.8"/> # <pause dur="1.6"/> why should the law focus on stereotypes <pause dur="1.0"/> well <pause dur="0.3"/> i think it's true historically <pause dur="0.5"/> that <pause dur="0.5"/> # it was the woman <pause dur="0.6"/> who was the object of the law <pause dur="1.7"/> # it's rather interesting that # <pause dur="0.7"/> in the middle of the nineteenth century <pause dur="1.3"/> # there was # an attempt <pause dur="0.9"/> to <pause dur="0.5"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> deal with some of the problems associated with prostitution <pause dur="0.8"/> # through some acts called the Contagious Diseases Acts <pause dur="0.9"/> very interesting acts <pause dur="0.8"/> # the Contagious Diseases Acts were <pause dur="0.6"/> focused on <pause dur="0.4"/> # naval and army bases <pause dur="1.4"/> and <pause dur="0.3"/> they

provided for <pause dur="0.4"/> # <pause dur="0.2"/> women <pause dur="0.8"/> who were found to be <pause dur="0.4"/> # involved in prostitution <pause dur="0.6"/> in the vicinity <pause dur="0.3"/> of naval and army bases <pause dur="0.6"/> they provided for these women to be <pause dur="1.0"/> forcibly taken from the streets <pause dur="0.5"/> to be subject to medical checks <pause dur="0.5"/> for # sexually transmissible diseases <pause dur="0.7"/> # and subject to compulsory cures if they were found to be infected <pause dur="2.4"/> and the law impacted on the women only <pause dur="1.1"/> well # <pause dur="0.3"/> it's rather interesting <pause dur="0.3"/> # the Contagious Diseases Acts were rather controversial <pause dur="0.8"/> and # <pause dur="0.2"/> a commission was set up to look into the operation of the acts <pause dur="0.9"/> and one of the issues which the <trunc>com</trunc> <pause dur="0.3"/> commission considered <pause dur="0.8"/> was whether the <pause dur="0.2"/> compulsory medical checks <pause dur="0.5"/> should apply to <pause dur="0.4"/> both sides of the prostitution equation <pause dur="1.1"/> # this was quickly dismissed <pause dur="0.9"/> they said <pause dur="0.8"/> well of course you can't do that <pause dur="0.6"/> the men are only # <pause dur="0.3"/> giving bent to quite

natural desires <pause dur="0.6"/> # whereas it's the degrading women who are <pause dur="0.3"/> committing the unnatural act of offering themselves for sex <pause dur="0.6"/> so <pause dur="0.5"/> if you like way back in the middle of the nineteenth century we have two very clear stereotypes of <pause dur="0.6"/> the man well who's to blame him <pause dur="0.7"/> you know he's just lumbered with this sort of # <pause dur="0.8"/> sexual desire built into to his nature <pause dur="0.6"/> the woman on the other hand is a depraved person who's exploiting the unfortunate man <pause dur="0.7"/> # and # <pause dur="0.5"/> dragging him into <pause dur="0.2"/> # <pause dur="0.4"/> evil ways <pause dur="1.5"/> and <pause dur="0.4"/> i think it's true historically that # prostitution has focused on the activities of <pause dur="0.3"/> women <pause dur="0.7"/> and not men perhaps we'll return to that <pause dur="0.6"/> next <pause dur="0.2"/> time <pause dur="1.0"/> thanks for coming don't forget to # to <pause dur="0.9"/> pick up your <gap reason="name" extent="1 word"/> statutes as you leave