Lets discuss;

Lets discuss;

A law of Augustus allowed that women guilty of adultery could be sentenced to forced prostitution in brothels.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_prostitution
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

T T H H I I C C

For the good of the human race? Yes, this is a good thing.

maybe i was a bit ambiguous;

would it be good to force men or women to prostitution if they were guilty of adultery?

But that's stupid, user. It's like punishing a murderer by making him an executioner, or a thief by making him a tax collector.

This.

False equivalency. Hi roastie, tits or gtfo

I don't know, it seems like putting their talents into good use.

is that really such a bad idea?

But who gets the money?

If slut wife bangs hard should could get rich. That's bullshit.

Yes, because you're giving degenerates a place in your society. Adultery should be viewed as a fundemental breach of contract and punished accordingly.

Based Romans as usual, fuck they were so awesome

its not because executioner and tax collecter are legitemate jobs that doesnt lower one's position in the society.

prostitution on the other hand lowers your position in society a lot, at least in under the roman law, which makes it an actual legitemate punishment.

as an example, if a woman conducts prostitution she is registered (in the roman law all prostitutes were registered with their name, age, where they were born, their nickname in which they will conduct prostitution under and the money they plan to take from costumers) and her name always stays on the list even after she dies.

so there is a clear degredation of social status hence a punishment unlike your tax collector example.

>thief by making him a tax collector.
implying that isn't already the case

in the roman law there was a tax on the prostitutes from each costumer.

prostitutes (unless they were also sort of actors or whatever) never earned too much money apparently. most of the money goes to pimp and to the government.

>state sponsored prostitution
the ancients considered pussy be a human right provided by the state

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred_prostitution

ancients basically considered women as some sort of property. they were inbetween men and slaves.

in ancient rome woman didnt have much social status and their social status was dictated by the achivements of their sons.

>its not because executioner and tax collecter are legitemate jobs that doesnt lower one's position in the society.

Not really, how many executioners do you have for friends? Or tax collectors? Even cops only hang out in their own circles, everyone else avoids them.

>prostitution on the other hand lowers your position in society a lot, at least in under the roman law, which makes it an actual legitemate punishment.

Being an adulteress lowers your position in society, forcing an adulteress to be a prostitute just makes it an option for her to live off her degenerate behavior.

>as an example, if a woman conducts prostitution she is registered (in the roman law all prostitutes were registered with their name, age, where they were born, their nickname in which they will conduct prostitution under and the money they plan to take from costumers) and her name always stays on the list even after she dies.

The bureaucracy of it all doesn't really affect the fundemental argument.

>so there is a clear degredation of social status hence a punishment unlike your tax collector example.

Tax collectors are far more reviled than whores.

we are talking about ancient rome which had the suitable social structure that enabled executioners (they were basically roman officials which meant they had social status) and tax collectors (again roman officials) some sort of social right which made them wanted positions for people.

thats not the case for prostitution. prostition according to roman sources rarely enabled woman to earn money (in fact women were most of the time degraded to slavehood which basically meant everything belongs to master/pimp), most of the money went to government as tax and to the pimp.


even though adultry also reduces the social stance as well in todays world, after a time it becomes accepted and the woman earns her stance back due to either changing say city that she lives or basically people kind of forgetting about it / not making a big deal.

thats not the case for the roman law, once you are a prostitute you are basically branded for good, there is no going back where as a tax collecter can just quit his job.

>we are talking about ancient rome which had the suitable social structure that enabled executioners (they were basically roman officials which meant they had social status) and tax collectors (again roman officials) some sort of social right which made them wanted positions for people.

We can't know how the Romans felt about their executioners and tax collectors, but we can assume based on how people felt about them in more recent times that they weren't very well liked. You know those masks that executioners often wear? They aren't a fashion statement.

>thats not the case for prostitution. prostition according to roman sources rarely enabled woman to earn money (in fact women were most of the time degraded to slavehood which basically meant everything belongs to master/pimp), most of the money went to government as tax and to the pimp.

And the master/pimp would still have to keep the prostitute alive and well-fed in order for her to turn a profit, hence creating a safety net for degenerates.

>even though adultry also reduces the social stance as well in todays world, after a time it becomes accepted and the woman earns her stance back due to either changing say city that she lives or basically people kind of forgetting about it / not making a big deal.

Women "earn" back their status because it's illegal to discriminate against them in any meaningful manner. There is no more freedom of association.

but in the roman times executioners didnt wear masks.

also even though people may or may not like the tax collector it was still regarded as a high position that people would like to achieve on day or another.

creating a safety net is not important since considering Maslow's pyramid of needs, the most important and base of the pyramid, the psychological part is not satisfied hence creating a stressful/pressure environment for the woman thus punishing her appropriately, nevermind the other parts of the pyramid of need (love, self-esteem etc.) which are of course not satisfied as well.

woman dont "earn" back their status, its just adultery isnt considered that big of a deal by many people in modern world and there is no way to brand a woman as adulteress as well to warn the future husbands (if she marries again).

>actual debate on Sup Forums
>started by a watermelon seller no less
Have a bump

>but in the roman times executioners didnt wear masks.

True, it's actually a 19th century phenomenon. But it actually serves my point since murderers weren't made into executioners.

>also even though people may or may not like the tax collector it was still regarded as a high position that people would like to achieve on day or another.

Yes, people wanted to become tax collectors because it was a position of power, and the power remedied the unpopularity. Still, thieves weren't put in this position.

>creating a safety net is not important since considering Maslow's pyramid of needs, the most important and base of the pyramid, the psychological part is not satisfied hence creating a stressful/pressure environment for the woman thus punishing her appropriately, nevermind the other parts of the pyramid of need (love, self-esteem etc.) which are of course not satisfied as well.

The base of Maslow's pyramid are physiological, not psychological needs. And who's to say the psychological needs wouldn't be satisfied? The woman would be protected by her master/pimp instead of her husband, and if she likes to fuck around, she would probably manage just fine as a whore after getting over the shame of being caught.

Just like in any other business, the women involved could get into a position of power through prostitution as prestigious concubines.

>woman dont "earn" back their status, its just adultery isnt considered that big of a deal by many people in modern world and there is no way to brand a woman as adulteress as well to warn the future husbands (if she marries again).

Branding a woman a whore is far easier today, with modern media and technology, than it was in Roman times. Just moving to another city would do more to fix her status then than it does now.

>A law of Augustus allowed that women guilty of adultery could be sentenced to forced prostitution in brothels.

Interesting solution.

Now that's a law I can get behind.

Romans were pretty based.

Husband had the right to kill both his wife and her lover when she cheated on him with another man.

and if he didn't do anything (divorce, kill or whatever) he was liable to prosecution for pimping.

Literally this, we have to bring it back
You say this like it was a bad thing

> Murdering a murderer
> Taking a thief´s money/hand
> Fucking a fucker

Don´t see the problem

honor culture is fucked up but lack of honor culture is degenerate

we need help

Julian law did not work, and would not work now, but I love Augustus for trying.

If you weren't married you were basically punished. And while I don't want that, I do wish there more incentives to be married.

I'm down for a modern, revised take that holds both sexes equally responsible.

Sex is a right if you are a woman or refugee.


Sex is a god given right. No sexually appealing woman has the right to deny a man sex.

the ancient ones were ahead of our times

its because executioners werent seen as "bad" people by society. they were a legitemate outcome unlike murderers. so making a murderer an executioner as a punishment doesnt mean a punishment since he ll be doing a socially accepted job.

regarding to the tax collecter is the same as executioner, having a legitemate job that is outcome of the society and not seen as a socially non-accepted position for a petty thieve is hardly a punishment.

regular people disliking a tax collector or a executioner doesnt mean they arent socially accepted positions hence doesnt create a punishment environment.

also people brand women as whores themselves but thats not so common and its limited in regions, as in, a woman's whoreness doesnt carried to different countries when she moves there most of the time. but roman prostitutes carried the branding themselves and the government itself branded the people anyways which is not something that happens in modern society.

think of it as branding a pedophile. pedophiles are branded by government due to the nature of their "crime".

>the taxpayer
mild kek

hello abdul how you're doing

not unreasonable as long as it works both ways