examples of misogyny permeating our culture, demonstrated by the bloke pouring hot coffee on his head.

[UnDeuxTroisCatsSank]

I read this article about a homeless man who accepted $5 from an arrogant shit in exchange for pouring hot coffee over his head. And the arrogant shit filmed it on his phone, presumably for "fun".

The homeless man, Ronald Leggatt, explained later he was desperate for the money and so willing to take the burns from the hot coffee.

Shocking and appalling behavior from the arrogant shit.

There's a happier ending in that someone overheard the whole thing, confronted the shit and then tried to make things better for Mr. Leggatt, including paying for him to get into a shelter during Hurricane Jonas and getting him some clothes from Walmart.

But this whole sorry story got me thinking. About the parallels with prostitution. Hang on, bear with me.

I just thought that most people would be appalled by the story of Mr Leggatt and empathize with his desperation to get $5 and yet when women are desperate, penniless, just surviving in dire financial straits and ready to do something, anything even though it will cause them harm such as sell their bodies, I don't see good Samaritans rushing to buy them clothes in Walmart and checking them into hostels for the night.

I think many people feel that people working as prostitutes are (a) willing and (b) maybe even like it. Never considering what desperation can make a person do.

Mr Leggatt was desperate and acted in a way that most people would never do.
Many prostituted women are desperate and act in a way that many people would never do.

One is understood and receives empathy, the other not only accepted but vilified, judged and othered.

Just thoughts about the misogyny that permeates our culture.

(And I hope Mr Leggatt gets medical help and support, because he does sound desperate, poor bloke.)

i disagree that im minimising it, but i am uncomfortable with "minimising" being used as a way to shut down debate.

I may not entirely agree with you, but to say that means im minimising it implies that you have some actual quantifiable facts here, and the very nature of sex work and the stigma means there just isnt that sort of data

In what way am I shutting down debate exactly? I'm simply calling you out for what I see as minimising the harm prostitution does. You are perfectly free to debate this, if you think that prostitution does no harm. This is an online comment site, not a government white paper. I can say that you are minimising the harm prostitution does, both to individual women and wider society, and you can tell me that I'm wrong for x reason. Or not, whatever you want.

where did i say it does no harm???

Have you read what ive actually written?

Saying that im minimising it is as useful as me accusing you of catastrophising (which i dont think)

Does anybody know if there were any consequences for the arrogant piece of shit that coerced a vulnerable person to harm themselves for the princely sum of 5 quid (or whatever it was) ?

According to the article I read, the police decided no criminal act had taken place. So no.

I hope that somebody punches his fucking lights out. Quietly, of course.

Branleuse, if you don't think you're minimising it, say why not. Why ask me for "quantifiable facts" as evidence of the harm prostitution does?

"So I think it would be useful to draw a boundary around two categories: sex women have because they want to, for fun. And sex women have because they want / need the money. "

Yup

"and that way, you get to turn to the person paying for the activity and say, why are you OK with using your economic power to require this person to do this thing, which might well harm them, simply because you will get pleasure from them doing it?"

Also yup.

YY Melinda. Great post.

According to the article I read, the police decided no criminal act had taken place. So no.

This strikes me as probably incorrect (the Police's position on the subject, not 12345's post). It's well-established in case law that it's difficult to consent to being assaulted. Far more likely that the police decided that, as a homeless person, his rights didn't matter.

im not asking you for quantifiable facts Venus, Im saying there arent any.

You try and get any decent quantifiable data on ANY black market work. Go on!

im surprised they didnt arrest him. i thought you couldnt legally consent to being harmed. Disnt they bring that in in the 90s, much to the dismay of the BDSM community.

Like anyfucker, id be happy to hear if that wanker got a good kicking

On that we agree, bran

It's the only thing these pond life understand. Get someone more powerful than them to teach him a lesson. A pity the police didn't step up and make an example of him.

Branleuse, you are hiding behind the lack of what you call "quantifiable facts". It's convenient for you that due to the nature of prostitution and the lack of reliable, verifiable figures you can deny that much harm is caused. The fact that you even mentioned this means that you want to deny it and play it down. Otherwise what relevance does a lack of "quantifiable facts" have to anything, if you agree that prostitution causes significant harm?

So I say again. For whatever reason, you wish to minimise the harm prostitution does. It's very clear.

FWIW, I think that some of the arguments boil down to 'but it's sex. Sex is fun. So it can't be as bad as agreeing to pour a boiling liquid over your head'.

Not so much fun as prostitution being alien to most people's life experience.

My take on it is most people never have to engage with prostitution either as customers or providers. If they think of it at all it is either a feeling of "well wouldn't fancy doing that" (either as customer or provider) or a bit of slumming in the red light districts of foreign cities.

They know it happens, but it is not illegal generally to sell sex (although pimping, brothels etc might be illegal)

On top of that you get highly respected people like the late Margo Macdonald, (impeccable left wing credentials for sticking up for the oppressed, national treasure etc ) lobbying for legal brothels and tolerance zones. Her mantle has been taken up by the likes of Jean Urquhart and the Green Party.

So , it might be unpleasant and not something most people ever do, but it's not illegal and hey there are all these people who have researched it, and they think prostitution is fine.

On the other hand almost every one at some point will have suffered a burn from hot liquid. Every parent knows to test baby's bath water. Every one knows how awful pouring boling water over yourself would be.

venus - im getting tired of you saying that I think something that I dont, and havent even said.

Branleuse

That's rich, considering that you presumed that I thought that "all prostitution is the same and all men who use prostitutes think in a certain way, and all women who do it are slaves", to quote you. Which I don't think, and haven't said. You don't understand my point.

Why did you refer to the lack of "quantifiable facts"? What point were you trying to make with this?:

I may not entirely agree with you, but to say that means im minimising it implies that you have some actual quantifiable facts here

I'm saying you're minimising the negative effects of prostitution (as a PP also said) because I think you're minimising them. I don't need "quantifiable facts" (to demonstrate what exactly?). Just calling it as I see it.

Do you really think there aren't many many documented cases where prostitution has been extremely harmful and damaging to women? If that's the kind of "facts" you say don't exist, you're very much mistaken.

I know this is a tangent and harking back to the "men are prostitutes too" but I think the same kind of mental block occurs when talking about prostitution with certain men because they can't differentiate between "sex that a person wants to have because of their sex drive" and "sex that a person has to have because they need money"

A great way of getting round this is pointing out to heterosexual men that if they ever felt they had to turn to prostitution to make ends meet, they likely wouldn't be having sex with women (no matter how attractive), but would be paid for having anal sex with men. After the initial protests of "but I'm not gay" there's a sudden realisation that, actually, female prostitutes don't enjoy the sex they have to have with their punters.

I've tried that line of argument (which I think is sound) on male posters on this sort of thread before, dodo, and never got them past the "but I'm not gay" point in the argument. They seem incapable of grasping that because an invited penis up your foof is nice, not all penises are, and in fact the uninvited ones are every bit as horrific an experience as being anally penetrated would be for them.

Of course the subset of male posters who come onto tgreads discussing prostitution tend to be punters or deliberately contrarian extreme libertarians arguing for the sake of it. I can only hope that a more representative sample of men would be able to grasp the point of your argument.

I agree Dodo - that should surely just bring it home and end it here, but as Lurcio says, there's a total disconnect - they can't see that a woman having sex with someone she doesn't want to have sex with is any different from a man having sex with someone he doesn't want to have sex with (ie. another man if he's not gay)

Personally, I don't think quantifying the harm is needed. I can imagine being in such a situation where I would do anything to keep a roof over my kids heads and food in their mouths, and I can start to imagine the mental effect that would have on me (disgust for men, shock at having to disconnect myself from my body to get through) - and that's before the physical dangers present - the high proportion of assault, risk of disease, damage caused by not wanting the sex and my body therefore not being prepared etc.

Anyone who doesn't think that's the case without studies showing it is severely lacking in imagination.

not 'is any different', but 'isn't any different

It also assumes, incorrectly, that all women are heterosexual.