Pimping has little to do with advertising, it’s a form of slavery. Nothing would stop a pimp from forcing his workers to be responsible for advertising themselves.

>it’s a form of slavery.

Or a protection racket.

Or just fee for protection.

Depends on the specific situation in question. There's a wide variety of schemes that fall under the definition of pimping.

Those are variations of slavery.

"You work or I will make you suffer" is slavery.

One of the primary functions of a pimp is to provide muscle/thread of violence to dissuade customers from abusing the workers.

Whether and do what degree the arrangement between the worker(s) and the pimp is exploitative is more or less tangential to that.

Big difference between "I will make you suffer" and "I won't intervene when someone I have no affiliation with nor obligation to interfere with makes you suffer."

Mall cops certainly haven't enslaved mall owners.

“A fee for protection” is not that. That’s the equivalent of hiring a bouncer.

> "You work or I will make you suffer" is slavery.

All work is slavery.

Amen

I got up late today, so I barely have time to make pancakes and coffee before I have to leave for my day’s slavery.. if I’m late, I’ll have to do the slavery in my underpants at home until the morning meetings are over. Then I’ll drive to my slavery and be stuck there for 5-6 hours, with only lunch and snack breaks. Unless I need to take off early to run errands anyway

Actual slaves that don't get paid and get whipped if they don't meet quotas would have a major problem with your statement.

Most of the people here not only have the option of quitting, but a fair number could probably choose not to work for several months, or even the rest of their life. They certainly are not slaves.

That's not a pimp, it's an Erotic Services Agent ~s

Wouldn't regulations be easier to enforce on agents and organizations instead of individuals?