is there and 'official' feminist view on prostitution? and what is it?

YY to Basil's post and also, it's like why the sale of human organs is banned; it's damaging to society to put a monetary value on such a thing. It's much more intimate than any healthcare or counselling job.

The men's behaviour thing; I said this on the other thread (the deleted one ); I can't imagine wanting to have sex with someone who didn't want to have sex with me, I would feel so gross, so repulsive. We need to look at creating a society where this is not ok in men's heads. They know it's not ok, because how many men do you know who admit to using prostitutes? It will be none, or a very few, because they know it is wrong and deemed to be abusive, grubby and repulsive by wider society. We are repulsed by the very notion of a man who would use a woman in that way, by someone who could have sex with someone who didn't want to with them.

I certainly wouldn't knowing sleep with someone like that.

Also I'm always more interested in the motives of people who are happy to inflict sex on people they know damned well don't want it with them (in other contexts known as rapists), than in those of the people who accept money in return for enduring these awful people.

SGB you're deflecting from men's behaviour here and focusing again on the choices of women. Also you're ignoring the fact that in the society we live in at the moment, sex is different from any other activity; it can cause pregnancy and / or disease and it has a different social status to any other. I think you can argue that it's a job like any other when we live in a society where women and men are treated as if they are both equally human and where women are not assumed to be there for men's use. Until then accepting that men have the right to use women as objects for their sexual gratification (instead of sex being an equal, happy experience for both men and women) is simply re-inforcing inequality IMO.

Why did the other thread get deleted please?

I still really don't get why paying for sexual services is so much more wrong than paying for any other kind of services where the seller is being paid to put (for the length of the transaction) the buyer's needs and wishes ahead of his/her own. Therapists/counsellors (whether legitimate or woo-peddling) are paid to give the impression that they care about the client, even when the client is a bore, an arsehole or an idiot. If your job involves physical contact with clients (massage, chiropody, dental care etc) you may well have to deal with clients who are unhygienic, rude, or continually make their own problems more difficult by refusing to follow advice.

If you want something that other people are not willing to provide you with out of affection or admiration for you, what's so awful about paying a fair price for it? Sex is more important to some people than it is to others, but it's not inherently sacred, or more special than any other form of recreational activity. Not everyone would like or even not mind engaging in sex for money, but lots of people would dislike or be freaked out by (eg) listening to someone talk at tedious length about his/her anxiety, or dealing with open wounds or incontinence. Not everyone has the right temperament to be an undertaker, either: that doesn't mean that choosing such a profession is wrong or makes you peculiar.

If you can't find someone who wants to have sex with you, then you will have to remain celibate.

Because other human beings are not there for your use.

HTH.

God can I just interject here how much I despise men who go on about how xyz is OK as long as women "consent" to it?

You do realise that consent is the lowest bar you can possibly use to excuse the fact that you are a fucking shit lover and a rapey git, don't you? Consent in a sexual context is something you get from someone who isn't really into whatever it is you're doing, but you want to go ahead and do it anyway and you don't want to think of yourself as a rapist but you don't much care if the other person enjoys it or not. In other words, you want to act like a rapist without thinking of yourself as one or having others think of you as one.

I give consent to financial authorities to access my financial notes, to internet companies to access my personal data, to medical authorities to carry out necessary (but not enjoyable) procedures.

I don't give consent to sex. I actively participate in it. Consent has no part in sex as far as I'm concerned, because nobody should be having sex with someone who is merely consenting. Sex should be had with someone who is enthusiastically, willingly, joyfully or at least actively participating because they want to have that particular bit of sex they are having right now (even if it's only because they want to get pregnant or get their partner pregnant - it may not be particularly joyful, but it is at least active, willing and participatory). If you are only looking for consent, then my god your bar is fucking low and you are telling the world that you are a terrible lover.

HTH.

"but how about for people who are unable to find a willing sexual partner?" So what is the alternative to a willing partner then?

(Sorry, didn't realise I'd posted the first half)

Again, society has rules about what canbe banned even if one person is willing to do something for money. It's not legal to work for less than the minimum wage, or to be paid for donating a kidney, or to be paid to be a surrogate (only expenses are allowed).

Do legal restrictions on these things mean the UK is not a capitalist society in your view? Given your area if study (thanks for answering) you must be aware of the evolution of laws like these, and like the ones on child labour etc.

So it's nonsense to talk about someone's right to do something overriding someone else's opinion as a way of closing down debate; many changes in society happened because a group of people held an opinion, campaigned for a change in the law and convinced lawmakers the change was justified.

As an example, marital rape was only made illegal in England and Wales in 1991. Until then, men had a RIGHT to non-consensual sex with their wives, whatever the OPINION of their wives and of feminists. I'm glad that law changed not long before you were born and astonished it took so long. Aren't you?

The difference is that there isn't much demand for heterosexual male prostitutes - i.e. the vast majority of women don't want to rent a stranger's penis.

If the demand was there, I would bet money that male prostitutes would be abundant.

Again, society has rules about what canbe banned even if one person is willing to do something for money. It's not legal to work for less than the minimum wage, or to be paid for donating a kidney, or to be paid to be a surrogate (only expenses are allowed).

Do legal restrictions on these things mean the UK is not a capitalist society in your view? Given your area if study (thanks for answering) you must be aware of the evolution of laws like these, and like the ones on child labour etc.

OP

If the purpose of the sex is to earn money, what difference does it make if it is a man renting his orifices to a man or a woman renting hers?

Why does the sexual orientation of the person with the orifices matter?

The difference is probably fear of rejection, which doesn't exist with a prostitute.

Someone's too shy to meet someone for a drink and see if they want to go further but they're not too shy to rent a person's vagina?

I am not saying that does, or does not, justify banning prostitution. What I am saying is how ingrained the thinking of women/girls as objects is, even by themselves or other women/girls.

I think what you don't understand about being a woman (and really, no man really could) is the message pounded into your head from the time you're, what, ten years old? Younger these days? That the most important thing you can be is beautiful, hot, sexy, etc etc etc.

You may be clever, or funny, or athletic, or kind, but it's just not as important as being hot. It's everywhere, this message. Everywhere you turn, that who you ARE is not quite as important as what you look like.

"Men will always want sex" Well, excluding asexual men, I suppose that's true. Although it's more "humans will always want sex" really, I know I do and am not a man.

But for fuck's sake, why not be an adult about it and find someone you fancy who fancies you too and get to it? The sense of entitlement is baffling.

OP I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt pending your response to this post. Take a step back, and try a little experiment for me. Try and imagine what it might be like growing up as a woman. Really try and empathise. Maybe take these following hooks to try to flesh out this thought experiment:

-The world is not setup with your gender as the "default", tv shows and movies, books and video games you grow up with almost always have a male character as the lead.

-A sport you may love to play, may well have a girls team at your school, but the adoration, status and kudos you get for winning regularly still doesn't even come close to the boys membership in a team for the same sport (plus better college scholarship opportunities).

-Almost every interaction you have with members of the opposite sex, is the constant worry that they may be a sexual predator, and it is somehow your responsibility and yours alone to stop the worst occurring. As you've seen your community consistently and repeatedly blame girls for the attacks they have suffered with questions like "what was she wearing?" Or "what did she expect going out drinking?".

-No matter how bright you are you can look forward to glass ceilings, pay gap disparity, men less capable than you being promoted before you in your dream profession.

If you really want to ace this exercise read some more threads on here, feel it out some more, or even actually ask some women in your own life what some of these experiences feel like. Then re-read your original post, and linger on that word you use. That word you use to justify your current belief. Freedom. Now ask yourself are we as men and as women equally free?

Sorry, I meant if the Op is real, not that my link to Kevin Wilson's twitterfed might be dubious. KW well worth following.

It's not irony. Evolution has fuck all to do with prostitution. Take a biology class if you want to understand evolution.