One reason it's probably not politically appealing is that there will certainly be some instances of manipulation, abuse, or other social problems associated with legalized prostitution, even if they are less than they would be otherwise. But those instances will look like they are state sponsored now. No politician wants to have to answer questions about a high profile rape indecent as a direct result of legislation they supported. It's politically better to appear to be strongly against the 10 rapes that happen in your district than to seem like you were in part responsible for 1. I'm not saying that's a good thing, just a consideration politicians probably make. But it's not really their fault, that's very likely how voters would react because sometimes voters are dumb when nuance and context are called for.
Edit: I forgot to mention the other side of the coin, which is that their political opponent would definitely use any such instances against them in the next election.
That and there’s probably fear that supporting it also makes one look like a Perv. Not to mention that politicians are the occupation most associated sleeping with Hookers
Fun fact! It’s illegal to own more than 6 sex toys in Texas, because that means you intend to sell them. No one enforces this law, sextoys are even sold at the mall and it’s a super old law. Just that nobody wants to be known as the “perv” who legalized owning 7 dildos.
84
u/Dr-Chris-C Mar 01 '23 edited Mar 01 '23
One reason it's probably not politically appealing is that there will certainly be some instances of manipulation, abuse, or other social problems associated with legalized prostitution, even if they are less than they would be otherwise. But those instances will look like they are state sponsored now. No politician wants to have to answer questions about a high profile rape indecent as a direct result of legislation they supported. It's politically better to appear to be strongly against the 10 rapes that happen in your district than to seem like you were in part responsible for 1. I'm not saying that's a good thing, just a consideration politicians probably make. But it's not really their fault, that's very likely how voters would react because sometimes voters are dumb when nuance and context are called for.
Edit: I forgot to mention the other side of the coin, which is that their political opponent would definitely use any such instances against them in the next election.