To think that you can absolutely buy consent

[TheNewWasp]

Unfortunately, we have a constant influx of threads of posters that have caught their spouses having lap dances or spending money on a sexual worker.
Regardless of how hurting this may be, I can't understand why many posters argue that "you can't buy consent".
Not sure if the assumption is that every sexual worker/prostitute is being forced to do that activity. Many do, that is the sad reality, but not all of them.
In fact, we have the occasional poster that said they used to work as a stripper and they used to make fun of their customers but in the end it was just a way of making good money. Was not this person selling their consent for an interaction that otherwise would have not happened?

You touched on addiction and poverty but not abuse. I don’t think I’ve known or worked with any sex worker without some ACE (adverse childhood events), normally abuse or witnessing violence. Sometimes neglect and poor parenting, sometimes bereavement.

And I have known and worked with a LOT of people, including dear friends. You don’t know me any more than I know you.

Probably. But the goal of defending the country, preventing invasion and protecting democracy trumps some things. Men getting laid doesn’t.

It depends what line of work you are in. You say you have worked with sex workers. I'd be interested to know if you mean in a professional capacity and if so was that counselling, social work or another branch of health? Because if that's the case then you are de facto going to engage with damaged people in some form or another.

Housing. So all situations. But yes, I’m homeless shelters it’s MUCH worse. And friends. More than one.

Anyone who works in a chicken factory on their feet all day for min wage isn't consenting by that logic.

I'm not a sex worker but if some random offered me a million quid for a shag.... hell yeah! In that situation my consent would literally be bought.

Let’s pick this apart. Someone offers you a million for a shag. It’s not going to be Robert Redford. It’s going to be someone either so repulsive that no one will shag them or they want something so harmful no one else will do it.

Intellectually, there’s a number many of us would consider. Emotionally, there’s no amount of money you wouldn't pay to not have PTSD or trauma.

It isn't even this "they want something so harmful no one else will do it"

Sex workers will tell you that men treat them badly during sex, either rough or violent, or dispassionately. They've paid for a product and expect you to deliver.

Well unless the punter is certain that the woman is not trafficked or coerced, he can't know she's truly consented. So he's not buying consent. He's buying the services of a woman who may or may not be consenting.

100% agree, although the pearl clutching will drive you mad in the responses.

The Nordic model comprises the economic and social policies as well as typical cultural practices common in the Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden).[1] This includes a comprehensive welfare state and multi-level collective bargaining[2] based on the economic foundations of social corporatism,[3][4] and a commitment to private ownership within a market-based mixed economy[5] – with Norway being a partial exception due to a large number of state-owned enterprises and state ownership in publicly listed firms.[6]

Yes, you are a man.

And probably a punter.

Seriously? Having preferences and boundaries is the same as accepting money for sex? What?

TF? Cleaning someone's house is the same as letting some pervert stick his diseased dick inside you for money? How, exactly?

No one is saying its the same.
PP is saying that just as you can buy someone's willingness to clean your house by offering money, you can buy someone's willingness to have sex for money.

Now how does that mean having sex for money has to be 'the same' as cleaning a house?

Not all are doing it under duress. There is no denying that there is a lot of sexual exploitation going on. However, there are also women who are not desperate for the money who are already wealthy and/or could make money in other ways but they choose to do sex work. Everyone has different morals, just because you would be appaled at the thought of sex for money doesn't mean every woman feels that way.
I personally find sex work immoral, I wouldn't have any associations with a man who used sex workers but I don't agree that sex work can't be consensual.

For those saying it’s a job like any other unappealing job, please read this article. No other job takes place inside the human body, none carries the same health (physical and mental) risks. Sex work is not work. It isn’t enlightened and forward thinking to say sex work is work, and is often said by middle class women who essentially think there should be a group of women who bear the brunt of men’s most unsavoury behaviour to spare the rest of us. The same women often support surrogacy, both times advocating for women to do things they would never do themselves or want for their mothers, children or friends. https://x.com/ellyarrow/status/1457104863377207300?s=46&t=rE8L_qvxLTDSTkXQVZ12fA

Consent has to be given freely without any other attachments so no it cannot be bought as there is a condition to the consent so it is purchasing a service. They may be buying a service or act, but no, you cannot buy consent from another person.

In regards to those who marry for money or have partners to fund their lives that is not consent, that is a transactional relationship.

If someone only gives "consent" because they need the money, it's coercion and not true consent.

I interpret it as once money are involved, we can't trust the consenting words to mean the actual free consent.

I think the idea that we can't, as a matter of principle, consent to things with a monetary motive, is bollocks.

And actually it's obviously bollocks, we all consent to do things for money all the time, that we would not do for free. That sometimes, we dislike, that may be very dangerous or have long term serious consequences.

I think a much stronger argument is that it is not good for society to allow sex for money transactions, just like we don't allow people to sell kidneys.

We could also make a strong argument, imo, that because sex can result in children, that is something that can't and shouldn't really be accommodated for within a commercial transaction - it's a bad basis for parenthood.

Thought experiment: all soldiers decide to refuse to work unless they are paid in sex. Now what?

No need to be insulting.

I despise the idea that 'sex work is work.' But by your logic, other dangerous jobs like building work, oil rigs, the military can't be consented to either.

I just don't think consent is ever free and enthusiastic…

It doesn’t have to be enthusiastic. I think posters are muddying what the definition of consent actually is here. It is an agreement.

If it is coerced through threat of violence or some other damaging element like blackmail, or is acquired by deceit, that obviously negates it, but agreeing to do something you’d rather not do or that is unpleasant is still legally giving your consent.

There seems to be this paradox on here where women are saying no sexual worker can give their consent bc it’s so degrading and they must have been coerced into it, then on the other hand throwing their full support behind women having the power to exercise autonomy over their own body and take part in Only Fans or escort work, or wearing sexually provocative barely/there clothing to promote products or just for their own self esteem…. Are these women also not actually giving their consent?