Anti-Heroic Welfare Whore Objects to Whoring for her Welfare

[Bono]

Telegraph.co.uk



'If you don't take a job as a prostitute, we can stop your benefits'
By Clare Chapman
(Filed: 30/01/2005)

A 25-year-old waitress who turned down a job providing "sexual services'' at a brothel in Berlin faces possible cuts to her unemployment benefit under laws introduced this year.
   
Motoreasy

Prostitution was legalised in Germany just over two years ago and brothel owners – who must pay tax and employee health insurance – were granted access to official databases of jobseekers.

The waitress, an unemployed information technology professional, had said that she was willing to work in a bar at night and had worked in a cafe.

She received a letter from the job centre telling her that an employer was interested in her "profile'' and that she should ring them. Only on doing so did the woman, who has not been identified for legal reasons, realise that she was calling a brothel.

Under Germany's welfare reforms, any woman under 55 who has been out of work for more than a year can be forced to take an available job – including in the sex industry – or lose her unemployment benefit. Last month German unemployment rose for the 11th consecutive month to 4.5 million, taking the number out of work to its highest since reunification in 1990.

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.

"There is now nothing in the law to stop women from being sent into the sex industry," said Merchthild Garweg, a lawyer from Hamburg who specialises in such cases. "The new regulations say that working in the sex industry is not immoral any more, and so jobs cannot be turned down without a risk to benefits."

Miss Garweg said that women who had worked in call centres had been offered jobs on telephone sex lines. At one job centre in the city of Gotha, a 23-year-old woman was told that she had to attend an interview as a "nude model", and should report back on the meeting. Employers in the sex industry can also advertise in job centres, a move that came into force this month. A job centre that refuses to accept the advertisement can be sued.

Tatiana Ulyanova, who owns a brothel in central Berlin, has been searching the online database of her local job centre for recruits.

"Why shouldn't I look for employees through the job centre when I pay my taxes just like anybody else?" said Miss Ulyanova.

Ulrich Kueperkoch wanted to open a brothel in Goerlitz, in former East Germany, but his local job centre withdrew his advertisement for 12 prostitutes, saying it would be impossible to find them.

Mr Kueperkoch said that he was confident of demand for a brothel in the area and planned to take a claim for compensation to the highest court. Prostitution was legalised in Germany in 2002 because the government believed that this would help to combat trafficking in women and cut links to organised crime.

Miss Garweg believes that pressure on job centres to meet employment targets will soon result in them using their powers to cut the benefits of women who refuse jobs providing sexual services.

"They are already prepared to push women into jobs related to sexual services, but which don't count as prostitution,'' she said.

"Now that prostitution is no longer considered by the law to be immoral, there is really nothing but the goodwill of the job centres to stop them from pushing women into jobs they don't want to do."

[Bono]

The welfare state meets prostitution legalization.

[Gabu]

That's, uh, kind of interesting.

[opebo]

Hah, hilarious.  Germany is so cool on the sexual issues.  As for the obvious way to resolve this issue - don't make welfare eligability contingent on taking whatever job is offered.  Leave it up to the individual whether that job is right for them.

That said, I bet in a country this economically egalitarian, sexual services are a lot more expensive than in Socially Darwinistic places like the US or the Third World.

[DanielX]

Regardless of what job it is, forcing someone to take any one job is bad.

If Germany said "get *A* job (btw, here's a list of available jobs) or you won't get any more money" that's okay, in fact that's great.

But saying "Get THIS job, or you won't get any more money" is not.

[David S]

Another classic example of socialism at work, this time turning women into sex slaves. More proof that socialism and freedom are incompatible.

[angus]

Another classic example of socialism at work, this time turning women into sex slaves. More proof that socialism and freedom are incompatible.

that's an interesting take on the situation.  actually, it was one of my first thoughts too.  Maybe I'm a closet Libertarian. 

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

hey now David, I don't agree with this. I actually think Daniel's idea is good.

[Rob]

I also agree with Daniel on this.

[Gabu]

I basically agree with Daniel's stance.  That's the way the welfare system is here in BC.

[Jake]

I agree she should have to get some job, but not one she doesn't want.  This is total bs.  You can't force someone to be a hooker to keep their welfare benefits.  Anyone who thinks they should be able to, should get a long stay in a small cell with a large, gay man.

[dazzleman]

I agree she should have to get some job, but not one she doesn't want.  This is total bs.  You can't force someone to be a hooker to keep their welfare benefits.  Anyone who thinks they should be able to, should get a long stay in a small cell with a large, gay man.

What's with your new name, dude?  Did you get hammered this weekend for the first time?

In any case, this puts liberals as well as conservatives in a quandry.  Conservatives believe, correctly in my opinion, that a person should not be able to continue to get welfare if he/she is rejecting potential employment.  On the other hand, conservatives generally don't believe in legalized prostitution.

Liberals in some places have argued in favor of legalized prostitution, and in places like Amsterdam, it is considered a perfectly legitimate profession.  If one accepts this super-liberal position, then why should she be able to reject a job as a prostitute?  Why should the taxpayers continue to pay for her when she has rejected a perfectly legitimate job.  One could argue that the job is a lot cushier than one sweeping the streets, or cleaning office buildings.

Prostitution shouldn't be legal in my opinion, so the answer is clear to me.  But as usual, many liberals want to have it both ways on this one.

[Jake]

I agree she should have to get some job, but not one she doesn't want.  This is total bs.  You can't force someone to be a hooker to keep their welfare benefits.  Anyone who thinks they should be able to, should get a long stay in a small cell with a large, gay man.

What's with your new name, dude?  Did you get hammered this weekend for the first time?

Just parodying Alcon and BRTD's age titles and BRTD's "drunk" title.

[opebo]

I agree she should have to get some job, but not one she doesn't want.  This is total bs.  You can't force someone to be a hooker to keep their welfare benefits.  Anyone who thinks they should be able to, should get a long stay in a small cell with a large, gay man.

Well, in a world without welfare, a lot more women would be forced by the reality of their circumstances to become prostitutes.

[Gabu]

Prostitution shouldn't be legal in my opinion, so the answer is clear to me.  But as usual, many liberals want to have it both ways on this one.

Personally, my view on it is that prostitution should be legal and regulated with standards placed on it.  There are many benefits that I see that would come about from doing this and not many downsides, really.  However, I don't think that it should be given complete legal equality with other professions, for the reason that this example in Germany illustrates.

[David S]

hey now David, I don't agree with this. I actually think Daniel's idea is good.

Ok start with Daniels idea and then say prostitution is the only job available. That gets right back to the same thing.

[DanielX]

hey now David, I don't agree with this. I actually think Daniel's idea is good.

Ok start with Daniels idea and then say prostitution is the only job available. That gets right back to the same thing.

Uh, only job available? That's not too likely to happen.... especially if the government is smart enough to give a wide date.

A better solution is to say, "You have two years to get a job, or you lose your benefits. At www.herearesomejobs.gov we have a list of job offerings in your area. Use it, don't use it, remember that you've got two years before you lose your benefits".

[dazzleman]

What's with your new name, dude?  Did you get hammered this weekend for the first time?

Just parodying Alcon and BRTD's age titles and BRTD's "drunk" title.

Cool.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Why shouldn't prostitution be legal? Keeping it illegal accomplishes nothing. It still happens, except it's unregulated and leads to spread of STDs and abuse of the women. Making it legal and means it can be regulated and stop these things.

[Richard]

What would make this so much more interesting is if they required a guy to be employed by a gay prostitution agency.

[Lunar]

Ack, a stupid quirk in an indiivudal system, let's stereotype it to support my individual ideology!

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Debunked:

http://www.snopes.com/media/notnews/brothel.asp

[TeePee4Prez]

I actually agree with Daniel as well.