Corbyn - "I'm in favour of decriminalising the sex industry"

"This is spot on, and also acknowledges the truth which is that actually a number of women choose to be prostitutes. They come on here now and again saying it's all dandy. Not all prostitutes are victims, but saying that is no doubt unfeminist as well."

There are plenty of things that people might want to do but we have legislation to stop them for the greater good.

.i didn't meant to make it sound as though you supported legalisation lass i think it's clear you don't.

Thanks. I agree if one is not in favour of legislation one has to square the circle of telling women what they can't do. I justify it on a greater good basis.

Which posters had said that? Palmer said something about men exploiting women for misoyginst gratification

Palmer made the comment below. I don't understand the point she is making. Can one still be a "feminist" and support legalisation but not be misogynistic? Or is it just "women" who support legalisation who are misogynistic ; or do you lose your feminist credentials if you support it?

And I'm not suggesting that feminists with a different position are misogynists, I'm saying that women who believe in decrim are

The Julie Bindel piece was excellent. The companion arrival by Alex Feis-Bryce on the other hand...

www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector-network/2016/mar/04/jeremy-corbyn-right-decriminalising-sex-industry-way-forward

Can we all agree that there is something intensely unsettling about a man whose entire professional career centres on trying to get prostitution legalised? And that he's actually hailed as some kind of progressive social justice hero because of it? What the hell?!

"I'm never sure if posters really believe there is no difference between a solicitor or a joiner or a cleaner or a plumber and a prostitute or if they are just ssying it to be provoking."

Most men misogynistically consider sex to be pleasure for men and work for women. There are blow jobs, hand jobs, and rim jobs, but no equivalent "job" for cunnilingus.

Men who compare sex to cleaning and plumbing must be the worst fucks in the world. I feel sorry for any woman who has to suffer sex with such selfish, pornsick losers for payment or not.

Thanks bue

I'm glad Harman has come out in opposition to it.

Julie Bindel on this subject

Harriet Harman, Jess Phillips and Stella Creasy (just now) have all commented: www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/04/harriet-harman-jeremy-corbyn-decriminalisation-sex-industry

oops posted too soon, i was trying to make light of that typo....i didn't meant to make it sound as though you supported legalisation lass i think it's clear you don't.

equiring cerebral apptitude oooooohhh....

Telling women they can legally sell sex but telling punters they may not legally purchase sex iseffectively telling women they may not do a certain act with their own bodies

I said that but taken out of context it looks as if I support legalisation. I don't.

One person has said it. It's an unusual variation on the usual theme that all of us who offer our services and the clients who pay for them are no different from prostitutes and punters.

Usually to prove the point a poster will pick a random selection from at one extreme services requiring cerebral apptitude and attracting high social status and high rewards (e.g what I do) to, in the poster's opinion, low status and low reward jobs (e.g my cleaner)

I'm never sure if posters really believe there is no difference between a solicitor or a joiner or a cleaner or a plumber and a prostitute or if they are just ssying it to be provoking.

At the point you first said this, mr Iliad:
"2 pages in and we already have posters calling feminists with a different opinion misogynists. "

Which posters had said that? Palmer said something about men exploiting women for misoyginst gratification.

Goddess, but this is tiresome.

Telling women they can legally sell sex but telling punters they may not legally purchase sex iseffectively telling women they may not do a certain act with their own bodies.

This is spot on, and also acknowledges the truth which is that actually a number of women choose to be prostitutes. They come on here now and again saying it's all dandy. Not all prostitutes are victims, but saying that is no doubt unfeminist as well.

Mr Iliad, do you honestly think that those on the other side just say "I don't agree"?

I think our carpet should be blue, DH thinks it should be grey. On that issue that causes no harm to anyone, I'm happy to say, "we disagree"

What if you think we should go back to sending children up chimneys? Revert to rape being legal in marriage? Cut maternity pay in half?

Do i say "I disagree"? No, I say you are wrong.

This is a side road.

There are also no laws requiring singing to only be done with full consent.

If a music teacher makes a child sing when they really don't want to, they aren't considered to be child abusers.

Oh for goodness sake - is sex for money seriously being compared to paying a singer on this thread?

Listening to someone's voice does not compromise their bodily integrity, it is not invasive - sex is. Buying sex as I see it is about sexual release for the purchaser; listening to a song is an appreciation of art. You don't then deposit bodily fluids inside the singer.

What a bizarre comparison.

And I'm not suggesting that feminists with a different position are misogynists, I'm saying that women who believe in decrim are

I'm not clear what you are saying here - do you mean feminists, or rather women who call themselves feminists but support legalisation are not feminists, regardless of what they call themselves?

whoops, that should be "coerced and extorted into unwanted sex = rape"

"ducks for cover"

Please stop this childishness.

When men around the world stop brutalizing and murdering prostituted women in horrific numbers, then I might change my opinion that men should not be allowed to have the hookers they hate so very much.

As things stand, non-prostituted women who sing songs (Kesha) are raped and denied justice because we live in a world saturated with prostitution and men like you who think a woman being coerced and extorted into unwanted rape (the definition of rape) is more akin to misdemeanor shoplifting than criminal terrorism.

Palmerviolet, some would say you're wrong for telling women what they can do with their own bodies

I'm not telling women what they can do with their own bodies, I'm telling men they have no right to exploit women for their sexual and misogynist gratification

Telling women they can legally sell sex but telling punters they may not legally purchase sex iseffectively telling women they may not do a certain act with their own bodies.

I don't have an issue with that. The discussion about surrogacy, organ and blood donation considered this. I don't have a problem with society deciding there are acts which are inherently damaging to society as a whole and they will not be permitted. Prostitution is degrading and dehumanising to all concerned.
.

Are feminists who believe in decriminalisation misogynists?

Some married men use prostitutes, I don't.

Devil's advocate: is renting a female singer's vocal cords wrong? is renting a masseur's hands wrong? or is it just the vagina which makes it wrong? And if so, why is sex the act which makes something immoral? ducks for cover

Firstly Palmer, I'm married, but well done on the cheap personal insult.

So are a large number of punters. Interesting that you think talking about other men being a john is insulting, yet you are arguing for johns.

Secondly, I'm just taking issue with the posters who seem to believe their opinion is fact. 2 pages in and we already have posters calling feminists with a different opinion misogynists.

My opinion is based on fact. And I'm not suggesting that feminists with a different position are misogynists, I'm saying that women who believe in decrim are.

HTH