There is some sort of misconception in the question. Let's try to sort it out.
First of all, prostitution and prostitution may be two different things. There is a large difference between self-determined, legal sex work and a factory brothel with below-minimum-wage workers that mostly don't speak the local language and have been forced into prostitution by making them indebted for the transport to the current country or abusing their drug addiction. Typically, one side criticizes the latter, while the other side praises the former, so often different sides don't talk about the same things.
That is also already an answer to the title: If we talk about the latter, it isn't really the choice of the women (or men, in some cases) to be a prostitute. If we talk about the former, it is. So what are we talking about?
But the rest of the points are also worth a comment:
It seems to me that we as a society are
- dictating to women how they can earn and how they cannot
The society of course limits the way one may earn money, and it limits this not only for women, but also for men. For example, you may not earn money by criminal acts, or without paying taxes, or under abusive working conditions. Prostitution - or better, some types of prostitution - are problematic especially concering the last point.
- removing the choice of what they can and can't do with their bodies
You may not choose to construct a high rise without safety measures. Prostitution is often even more dangerous than that, with a severe risk of getting raped or infected with dangerous diseases. You can in principle try to regulate that, but that often doesn't go down well with customers. When it comes to dangerous behavior, the state often limits the choices of what you do with your own body. You may not sell parts of your body, you may not consume drugs like heroine or cocaine, etc. From a radically libertarian point of view, this may be inacceptable, but that's the way it currently is. It is not restricted to prostitution or women.
- increasing the chances of a secondary effect arising: the international sex slave trade
This is a very bad argument, although often brought up. But think about it: If it really would be an argument to allow something just because it will happen illegally anyway (and then under worse conditions), what about child prostitution? Shouldn't we legalize this as well as it would happen anyway and we could reduce international child sex slave trade by allowing this?
I think most people would rightfully abhor this idea and declare it absurd. But the logic is no less absurd for prostitution in general.