Why is the BBC Promoting Sex Work?

To be clear, even if every single prostituted woman was 100% freely choosing sex work and loved their jobs and not a single one was doing it due to poverty, addiction or abuse, and if you offered them a job as a CEO or a doctor tomorrow they'd turn it down because they just looooove sex work so much, I would still oppose it because it doesn't just effect them. You think the kind of men who pay to fuck women go out into the world and treat every other woman they meet with respect? You think they can commit one of the most vile and mysogynistic acts imaginable on Monday and then be A* feminist allies the rest of the week? No, of course not. They're revolting woman hating creeps who at best see us as nothing more than glorified wank socks and at worst enjoy the feeling of having economic and sexual power over us. They go out and buy women because they hate us and feel entitled to our bodies and then they go back into the world emboldened and validated in their mysogyny and pose an even higher risk to other women than they did before. One woman's "choice" to do sex work effects me, you, my daughter, all of us. Making her safer in her work is great for her, but I am no safer because of it. The man who thinks he has the right to buy her will still become more dangerous to me even if you put laws in place that make him less dangerous to her. So thanks but no thanks, the choices of some women are not worth more than the rights of all women to live safe from male violence.

Has it made it worse? I doubt anything could make that end of the market (a fairly small one even when looking at prostitution in the UK let alone the entire sex industry) very much better.

Yes, it has definitely made it worse for other women and girls who live there.

HTH.

The message "earn £20k a month selling nudes" is especially repulsive at a point in time when many woman are suffering extreme financial hardship. Imagine losing your job and not being able to find a new one under lockdown and then seeing that article. It's so irresponsible if the BBC to print it. Of course though with a recession coming the more women they can convince to go into "sex work" the more real jobs there'll be left over for the men.

*@RuffleCrow * Statistically, most women in sex work were driven there through poverty, abuse and/or addiction Where are these statistics? There is no representative sampling of prostitutes in existence.

The recent home Office sponsored report which was supposed to produce a quantified typology of the sex industry in England and Wales here totally failed to produce any statistics. There is no basis for your claim for most women all we know is that some women are be driven by abuse or addiction.

And again how do you know it’s only a few women choose it? What we do know is that there are many that do here

Don’t make claims you cannot back up with evidence

Brilliant post Sophecles.

Well said SophocIestheFox

Nothing to add here that hasn’t already been eloquently explained already, but I did want to weigh in on the concept of judging women who enter prostitution or are prostituted, or do online form of it. I’m not judging them, I’m not looking down on them, I’m not particularly pitying them. I wish there was a way of their earning a living that wasn’t what they’re doing, though.

What I do have the most scalding, pitiless contempt for is punters and pimps. They’re the one whose choices I judge the utter fuck out of.

I’ve no interest in recrimininalising or decriminalising any aspect of prostitution. What I’m interested in is reinforcing the concept that women are whole, autonomous human beings whose bodies cannot be purchased or commodified in a civilised society. I’d like to see visiting prostitutes and using pornography to go the way of the village stocks, or eugenics, or slavery or capital punishment or any other archaic custom that civilised societies eventually come to realise are inimical to human dignity.

And part of that process is looking at ridiculous puff pieces like that BBC one, saying “nope” and deconstructing the harmful parts of the message, then offering an alternative, feminist analysis.

I await the accusation that I’m a dried up old prude whose husband should leave her with keen anticipation

"Is life better for prostituted women, or women and girls in general, in Holbeck now the hiring of women's bodies is decriminalised?! Fuck no, is the short answer."

Has it made it worse? I doubt anything could make that end of the market (a fairly small one even when looking at prostitution in the UK let alone the entire sex industry) very much better.

You could make it worse for the women by arresting the women, fining them and essentially sending them back on the streets to earn the money for the fine as currently happens in most red light districts in the UK.

Ah sorry palebluemoonlight I didn't read the comment properly and assumed Butter had written it and was advocating for it as a system.

"It is disingenuous to pretend that legalising an activity does not legitimise it. Of course it does."

Portugal hasn't found that to be the case. Numbers of drug users hasn't risen with decriminalisation. A lot of evidence shows that drug use went up since drugs were made illegal.

But I grant you it is a risk. Decriminalising drugs could increase the number of users. Of cannabis there would almost certainly be a rise in numbers. However, I think it is preferable to our current war on drugs which is a war we are losing and which has created a huge number of victims of violence.

Bygrabthars I think that might be directed at me. I do see it, I was just putting the argument.

However much it might make economic sense for an individual to choose to sell a kidney or a baby, we consider it unacceptable to protect the greater good, including protecting those at risk of coercion and abuse. For the same reasons it is unacceptable to treat prostitution as a normal job just because some women say they want to do it. I don’t care if you love being a hooker; your individual choices impact all women - and men - in our society, including those who do need our ‘kind of protection’.

This. Perfectly put.

£20,000 a month 😲

How do I sign up?

"The principle is the same only if you view the hiring of bodies as the same as taking drugs or drinking alcohol? You say you don’t, so why do you think the same principle applies?"

You're not hiring a body you're hiring a service and a cursory glance at the evidence will easily show you that the same principle applies to both.

If the prostitutes woman is vulnerable from her "non abusive" punters then they aren't non abusive, are they? All you're saying is that they're non abusive until they feel "provoked" by a prostituted woman taking steps to protect herself. In fact if anything it just highlights the fact that even the "nice" punters are a high risk for becoming violent. What you're basically saying is that we shouldn't opt for a system that aims to prevent and discourage men from buying women, in case it negatively effects ("spooks") men who want to buy women. And that we should make it easier for potentially violent men to sexually access vulnerable women in case preventing them from doing so makes them violent. It's the same argument women used to be given about keeping their husbands satisfied so they didn't need to force them. Give me what I want or I'll take it and it'll be your fault for making me do it. These are the kind of men you're admitting are the ones buying sex. How can you not see what terrible danger that puts women in? How can you not see that this industry needs to be stamped out for the sake of all women?

"How does doubling the chance he will be prosecuted make it less safe for the woman to report him?"

If selling antiques was legal but buying them was not and the antiques dealer depended for his/her livelihood in keeping the transaction secret then they would be likely to put themselves in dangerous situations to sell antiques, such as dark corners in car parks rather than openly in a shop or fair.

You only need to read the reports of sex workers in Sweden to how badly the legislation is impacting them. Don't take my word for it, go look for yourself outside feminist propaganda sites.

*argument, not regiment

Langbannedforsafeguardingkids

I'm saving your post at 11.20 for future use. Brilliantly put.

Bygrathars I think the regiment is that by criminalising the purchasing of sex, you make the prostitute vulnerable because they could bring charges against any of their punters, not just the abusive ones, so in order to keep their punters happy they would not report the abusive punter in case it spooked/riled the non-abusive punter.

The principle is the same only if you view the hiring of bodies as the same as taking drugs or drinking alcohol? You say you don’t, so why do you think the same principle applies?

and according to you consumption has declined (I have no knowledge as to whether that is true

It isn't 'according to me' it is a fact. Smoking is in terminal decline in the UK. Air France was one of the last airlines to ban smoking. Now? The concept of smoking long haul is unimaginable. It used to be ubiquitous. It is disingenuous to pretend that legalising an activity does not legitimise it. Of course it does. It makes it socially acceptable. Those who want to make prostitution and heroin socially acceptable? That's a niche agenda. Expect opposition.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/health-matters-stopping-smoking-what-works/health-matters-stopping-smoking-what-works

It really doesn't butters. You simply are very selective in the examples you're prepared to examine. Is life better for prostituted women, or women and girls in general, in Holbeck now the hiring of women's bodies is decriminalised?! Fuck no, is the short answer.

Your ideas about decrim for all vs criminalising just the buyer don't make sense Butters. If buying is an offense but not selling then for a prostituted woman reporting abuse, the abuse is the crime against her in both scearios and she has commited no crime in either. The difference is that in the decrim scenario the man has only commited one offense (the abuse) but in nordic model he has commited 2 (the abuse and the purchase of sex). How does doubling the chance he will be prosecuted make it less safe for the woman to report him?

"As you keep comparing the human body to a commodity, that is clearly your starting point. It certainly isn't mine."

I don't. My point is that the principle remains the same whether we are talking about drink, drugs or sex. Prohibition of all three makes things worse for all involved. I should be interested for you to prove the contrary but I doubt you can because your emotions and feelings of disgust or too dominant for you to think clearly about the issue.

People in the sex industry use their bodies for commercial ends but so do boxers, stunt men/women, track athletes, dancers etc.

Of course it has societal implications. Just as hiring any single member of an oppressed group in order to do degrading things to them would have society-wide implications.