Yes i see how it works just fine. but you are changing the argument here. The original point was whether people who engage in said activities were druggies or damaged goods who were being exploited. this is universally known to be true, and you are holding up a few glamourized depictions of high class call girls as a counterpoint when that is not the reality of the prostitution industry.
people are going to do what they are going to do. But i would bet that if your girl somehow got hooked on crack and wound up sucking cock at the local park-and-ride for drugs, you wouldn't be happy about it. not that that would happen as your girlfriend probably has a strong moral compass but i think you see my point.
I did not drag drugs into this, YOU did. Drugs have nothing to do with Prostitution. Prostitution does not require or operate with the requirement of drug use since Prostitution is simply paying or charging for the act of sex. No where are drugs a requirement. Furthermore, the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of DRUG users are NOT PROSTITUTES. Besides, even if a prostitute was a drug user, so what. One is not required to be a drug user and those seeking out a non-drug using prostitute can easily do so.
Why are you not holding drug abusing people who have sex for free, which outnumber drug abusing prostitutes OVERWHELMINGLY, to the same standards? If you are not holding these people to the same standards, then it is simply the Monetary aspect that is troubling you.
If you ARE holding these people to the same standards, then Prostitution is NOT your problem, drug usage is.
Why would getting hooked on crack automatically make you eligible to be a prostitute? You see the huge errors in your argument? You are arguing against Drug Usage for no apparent reason.