2007-02-05 07:22:52 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Social Science ➔ Sociology
No. I know its fashionable now to buy into a watered down form of relativism where you avoid absolutes and instead say "well, maybe" or "depending on the culture..," but I say **NO**. As a world, we need to say no--it is not ok to exploit people just because they are poorer than you. This means: it is NOT ok to open a factory in Mexico that barely pays workers enough to stay alive (just b/c...you can). It is NOT ok to outsource American jobs, destroying our economy in the process (b/c its cheaper, and poorer workers will do more for less). And it is NOT ok to sexually exploit people in other countries just because...well, you can.
NO NO NO. I think we in the developed, relatively affluent parts of the world need to start saying that exploitation is not acceptable anymore.
2007-02-05 17:21:09 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think we have enough people indulging in sex as it is without sex tourism being added to add further filth to our economy. Countries that have sex tourism also have child prostitution.
2007-02-05 15:27:16 · answer #2 · answered by Sparkles 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sure, why not. Is sex tourism any more immoral than the horrific marketing at Disneyworld and other theme parks?
2007-02-05 19:02:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
No. If we want to witness more animalistic mentalities on display, we can visit numerous zoos and gawk at the monkeys.
2007-02-05 18:46:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
"Sex tourism" is a euphamism for raping women who are forced into that "trade" against their wills--in otherwords, they are slaves.
2007-02-06 00:47:59 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hell NOOO !
2007-02-05 16:08:00 · answer #6 · answered by Charlotta G 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is, isn't it?
2007-02-05 15:27:15 · answer #7 · answered by Fester Frump 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋