How is it possible to be a feminist and support the sex industry?

SolidGoldBrass, I agree with you. Poor people are exploited by people who want to make money. Rich boxing promoters need new talent and it can be dangerous for the young men who enter, but they offer the young men big financial rewards if they succeed, so it is a tradeoff. There are not many upper-class professional boxers, it is mainly poor men without too many prospects, although at Oxford University rich men from public schools also do boxing, but the Oxford types don't make a career of it. Similarly, on the whole it is poor women who enter prostitution. A woman from Oxford University, who has the chance of becoming a lawyer, is unlikely to enter prostitution.

The sex industry exists to make money, and some women can become rich in it, but many others will just end up being used by the industry.

The question is, is the sex industry so harmful that it should be prohibited? Some countries think so and do prohibit it, but our society does not think so and does not prohibit it.

Claig: there is also an issue WRT men being exploited for their bodies when you think of boxing, and the rather disproportionate numbers of young black men who go into it. Yes, a successful boxer can earn a lot of money but at the risk of serious injury, disability and death.
I think everyone would agree that exploitation of the unwilling and desperately broke is wrong, but this is a much bigger and wider social problem than will be solved by condemning and prohibiting the whole of the sex industry.

dittany is right when she says that there is an increasing trend to glamourise the industry with these Belle de Jour type TV programmes and newspaper articles. An interesting question is why is this happening? I don't believe it is patriarchy, I believe it is for the same reason that drugs are being made more attractive to young people by giving publicity to Amy Winehouse and Pete Doherty etc.

frankfrankly, I think most people agree with you, that is why these things are kept quiet and not much publicity is given to them, but they do go on.

Interesting link Claig. It doesn't surprise me that this work exists, but as the article makes clear it is a contested area and not everyone agrees its a professional form of therapy. I'm afraid I'm of the mind it's just another high-end form of prostitution with a pseudo 'therapy' edge. Bet you could have guessed that though

"is the sex industry (and I wasn't only talking about prostitution) inherently damaging to women"

this is the key question, and it is the question that society as a whole is always asking itself. Bindel, religious groups, parents etc. are all asking this question. What is the answer and why?

frankfrankly, I agree with you, many women become addicted to drugs and do not increase their earnings. They are trapped. But some do eventually escape, having made some money, provided they kept drug-free etc. I agree that for most women once they are in it, it is difficult to get out. This is what pimps and the industry want as it keeps them forever hostage.

frankfrankly, these type of sex therapists do exist. I have just googled and found a link to what they call "sex surrogates".

www.drpetra.co.uk/blog/spotlight-on-sex-surrogacy/

" It is usually entered by women who need the money, either to feed a drug habit or to provide for their families. As time goes on they can often move up in the industry and increase their earnings. The financial rewards have to be high in order to keep women doing it. "

I think the opposite is the case. As time goes on they usually earn less, their drug habit becomes more expensive, the physical affects of drugs abuse, as well as sexual exploitation, take a toll on their bodies, they become less attractive, more importantly they get older, and they get cheaper. Meanwhile a new contingent of younger girls/women enter the trade and take the work. I think it is extremely rare for anyone to 'move up the ladder' in prostitution. I think women keep doing it because they have little other choice. Who's going to employ someone whose CV says their last 5/10 years have been spent in prostitution. That's part of the problem, there are so few ways out for women who want to 'choose' to leave.

Molesworth, I don't think it is about 'good Johns' and 'bad Johns'.
"the 'good johns' who might visit MissHM and Mandamumu, and then the 'bad johns' who don't want to visit MissHM and Mandamumu because the degradation and abuse of the women they use is part of the thrill, and that sort of behaviour is never going to be acceptable as part of a legal prostitution setup."

Not all Johns can afford MissHoneyMoon's prices, the legalised establishments are too expensive for many of the Johns. So the criminals set up illegal establishments, which are cheaper, and that is where the poor Johns go. The criminals supply to all sectors of the population.

LillyBordello,
"Drug supplies are restricted and there is still a demand, and if you know where to look you can quite easily get happily stoned to your hearts content. Yes, society can take measures to restrict supply, but where there is a need, we as human beings will find a way to fulfill it."

It can quite easily be stopped. It depends if society wants to impose draconian punishments on these activities, like they do in some Far Eastern or Middle Eastern countries. Our society tolerates these activities to a certain degree, because they do not believe that they warrant the really draconian penalties. This could easily change. This is why Bindel et al. and religious groups campaign to try to change society's views. But at the moment their voices are not heard.

Also meant to say a sex therapist doesn't perform sexual acts with the client.

SGB - i agree that researchers can't always interview everyone, but that is well known and there are various ways of making your research unbiased and fair, so that it can be used in discussions. Good research does that, bad research falls down there. I've not looked into these stats, so I can't comment on them.

What we have said already on this thread is that it is easier to get in touch with sex workers who earn more, who are more educated, have access to social media, are on the chat forums and support networks that have been mentioned, so I would expect (but don't know) that it would be easier to get their voices represented in research.

Personally, I don't consider sex work equivalent to any form of service that touches the human body, so I couldn't make that comparison with massage. There is a world of difference between getting a massage/facial and between buying sexual services.

I think frankfrankly's statistics are true. Most women who enter the industry at a young age were tricked into it or pimped or had friends who were already doing it, or had few other financial prospects. It is usually entered by women who need the money, either to feed a drug habit or to provide for their families. As time goes on they can often move up in the industry and increase their earnings. The financial rewards have to be high in order to keep women doing it. Disadvantaged young men can't earn money this way, so certain disadvantaged young men enter the drug trade instead. Most of these men come from the same disadvantaged backgrounds highlighted in frankfrankly's statistics. If no poverty existed and opportunities existed for all, then far fewer women and men would enter any of these industries. But the world is not like that, there will always be poverty.

There are students at University who enter to pay their fees etc. but they are in the minority and usually don't intend to stay in the industry for long.

Drug supplies are restricted and there is still a demand, and if you know where to look you can quite easily get happily stoned to your hearts content. Yes, society can take measures to restrict supply, but where there is a need, we as human beings will find a way to fulfill it.

SolidGoldBrass is right
"I have heard more than once a recommendation that people who are very isolated for reasons such as disability/poor social skills or whatever, should book themselves a massage (not in the context of actual sexual contact or massage as a euphemism for paid sex) because it is unhealthy for human beings to be starved of touch."

there are real sex therapies which help people with sexual problems by using aspects of sex to overcome their problems.

frankfrankly, historically men had more money than women, and the suppliers wanted to get hold of some of that money. Therefore they supplied to the men with the money. Not many women are interested in paying £1000 a night for sex, the market is nowhere near the same, so the criminals can't make that sort of money off of female customers. Criminals can hook women on drugs so they can fleece women there, and they get a double whammy because in order for the women to pay for the drugs, the women have to work in the criminals' sex industry to be able to afford their habit. Criminals don't care who they fleece as long as they can keep earning.

Frankfrankly: the trouble with those statistics is the same trouble with any statistics, they are not infallible because not everyone tells the truth and no statistical analysis can interview everyone. Home Office statistics are going to refer to sex workers who have come to the attention of the police - not all sex workers do come to the attention of the police, particularly the ones who are not coerced and who are working independently. It seems possible to me that these statistics refer predominantly if not entirely to street prostitution and/or full-time brothels eg the really awful, drug-heavy, exploitative end of the industry.

WRT the issue of sex and disability and paying for sexual services, I have heard more than once a recommendation that people who are very isolated for reasons such as disability/poor social skills or whatever, should book themselves a massage (not in the context of actual sexual contact or massage as a euphemism for paid sex) because it is unhealthy for human beings to be starved of touch.

claig - i agree that money has a lot to do with the sex industry. But, the fact that the overwhelming majority of sellers are women and buyers are men means that there is something more than just market forces at work.

"With ref to LillyB and claig's posts of 10.08 and 10.09 - underlying your posts is the idea that men have an inevitable need for sex."

I think it comes down to supply and demand. If sex for sale is available, then some men will pay for it. If drugs are on sale, then some people will buy them. Society usually makes laws to make these activities illegal, restricting the supply, which means less people are prepared to pay. If society chooses to make these activities illegal and imposes very harsh punishments on both suppliers and purchasers then the vast majority of the problem will disappear. Suppliers will have to find another market where they can earn this sort of money, and purchasers will no longer be able to buy since there is no supply.

It is up to society to decide whether it wants to restrict supply or not, and it takes these decisions based on philosophical, moral and ethical arguments.

I found some stats on the Object website. (sorry to cut and paste)

75% of women involved in prostitution started as children.

74% of women cite poverty as the primary motivator for entering prostitution (Melrose 2002).

Up to 70% of women in prostitution spent time in care, 45% report sexual abuse and 85% physical abuse within their families (Home Office 2006).

Up to 95% of women in prostitution are problematic drug users, including around 78% heroin users and rising numbers of crack cocaine addicts (Home Office 2004a).

More than half of UK women in prostitution have been raped and/or seriously sexually assaulted. At least three quarters have been physically assaulted (Home Office 2004b).

68% of women in prostitution meet the criteria for Post Traumatic Stress Disorder in the same range as torture victims and combat veterans undergoing treatment (Ramsey et al 1993).

I don't buy the argument that prostitution is about patriarchy keeping women down. I think it is about money, large amounts of money and that is why criminal elements are often at the heart of the industry because vast amounts of easy money can be made from it. In this way I think the sex trade is similar to the drug trade, where criminal gangs are able to earn vast sums of money. As it is a very large industry, criminals do not control all parts of the industry, many prostitutes can work independently. I think the abused and trafficked women are forced into the industry by criminals in order to increase supply. But there are many 'happy hookers' such as MissHoneyMoon who are not tied into any of this at all. I don't think MissHoneyMoon is exploited, I think she has chosen to do it, due to the large financial rewards available.

I think seeker is asking the real question at the core of the issue i.e. is it true that prostitution "informs wider society's view of women and perpetuates misogyny"?

Society as a whole does disapprove of prostitution, is it for the above reason or for some other reason? I think that MissHoneyMoon makes a good point, that Bindel is on the same side as many ultra-religious groups (and even Mary Whitehouse type groups) who are against prostitution because they find it degrading. Bindel adds the extra factor about patriarchy, but I am not sure it is to do with patriarchy, I think it is more to do with the stuff that makes the world go around, money.

I'm sure disabled people do pay for sex, just as able-bodied people do, but when that is rolled out as a pro prostitution argument as some kind of do-gooder work, I think that is offensive to disabled people.

Also, I think that implying that disabled people are 'safe,' that they couldn't possibly be abusive to women, that they are poor people who need help in that department is misleading.