Prostitution; help me argue on Facebook

[MrsTerryPratchett]

I'm arguing with a friend on FB about prostitution. She is the most libfem, choosy choice, libertarian person I know. Currently at college so every second post is about gender neutral bathrooms and the like. I almost never engage.

But her argument is that most prostitution is hidden and therefore we can't know that these workers aren't happy, healthy, free and consenting. I've given her the PTSD stats and the violence and rape stats. But she is insisting that these invisible women are all loving it.

Any stats on home-based, self-employed workers? Also, I know that people here have said that workers' organisations are frequently dominated by pimps. Where's the proof of that. And, former workers who are radfem/anti-sex work and have written pieces about it?

Sorry to use your labour

Also since when did making something illegal stop people from doing it?? When we finally accept that this is one of the oldest professions in the book, and will continue regardless of the law, we can start creating safe environments for women to work together and legislate it once and for all (screen buyers, ensure disease free etc). Making it illegal just means more criminals will use the service, they can remain anonymous, and the women's safety will be forever at risk.

when did making something illegal stop people from doing it??
Indeed. Sadly people still commit all sorts of crimes even though they are illegal, this is not a reason to do away with the law.

this is one of the oldest professions

1. Aping male fantasies and getting fucked for money by misogynists is not a 'profession' no one needs a qualification to do it.
2. Child marriage, slavery, sexual exploitation, abduction of 'wives' have a similar time line to prostitution. Their long history is no reason for their continuation.

start creating safe environments for women to work together
Why is this not happening already? Why is this utopian prostitution fantasy not happening here now or in Amsterdam, or Prague, or NZ?

Making it illegal just means more criminals will use the service
Indeed criminalising the buyer will mean all buyers are criminals.

they can remain anonymous
Don't they already?

women's safety will be forever at risk.
As long as there is prostitution, there is risk. Getting fucked by misogynists for a living is inherently unsafe.

I don't think an overthrow of capitalism is necessary to start implementing these changes.

It's not about overthrowing capitalism. There isn't an intrinsic problem with capitalism so long as it is regulated and harnassed to meet legitimate human needs rather than enfranchising one section society while impoverishing another. A flourishing private sector is a good thing. That is not what exists at the moment. Capitalism is now extractive. The corporate elite, the tech oligarchs, the financiers and the property investors are drawing money out of the real economy and then financialising them into assets - the rate of return on which is actually exceeding growth. In short that means that there are some super rich people at the top and a lot of poor people with insecure work who can barely afford to pay exorbitant rents at the bottom.

You cannot argue that those conditions have nothing to do with a sex industry which is expanding at a massive rate. The internet is the fullest realisation of a deregulated global economic model, and sex, not coincidentally, features prominently in that model. Sex, the lowest common denominator of human nature, sells. This is why advertisers employ it so commonly. And it is also why so many internet capitalists saw sexual services as easy money and became pornographers or delivered other sexual services. And I really think we should extend our definition of prostitution to pornography because it is effectively the same thing in visual form. If anything, it's even more deregulated and abusive.

Now, you can argue that men should not look at porn or use prostitutes (and by way what do you have to say about the increasing numbers of women who use porn? Are they guilt of exploiting these women too?)and you'd be right; but arguments alone are powerless against a vast global industry that, as I have said, interfaces with banks, credit card companies, hotel chains, Google, Facebook, Twitter and even criminal industries - a vast trade in commodified sex with with tendrils everywhere.

Further to that there are the economic conditions that vulnerable women find themselves in. Of course if you created a social democratic utopia then there would still be prostitution, but how on earth is that an argument against not doing something that will significantly reduce it? As well as well the more diffuse patriarchal stuff you mention, women are driven into prostitution by material conditions. There is usually some economic imperative there - whether they're trying to get off the streets, feed their kids, supplement a meagre wage or pay off a student loan. If you remove those imperatives then you might not have eliminated prostitution, but you have reduced it. So why not do that?

You cannot change anything just by advancing arguments. No one ever has. Things can only be changed programmatically.

It seems that many progressives have gone over to the right and are averse to any solution which might mean they have to pay more tax. I find that deeply saddening.

What a load of nonsense - prostitution is (unless forced or trafficked) consensual. Therefore not rape. At all.

Well it's bordering on it. If a woman, due to the circumstances she finds herself in, feels she has no choice but to have sex with a man she doesn't want to have sex with, then that is clearly not an equitable relation.

Also since when did making something illegal stop people from doing it??

Only by making an activity an offence can you then impose a punitive sentence - in the hope that the incidences of that activity will diminish - Pour encourager les autres.

Also it wouldn't just be prostitution, the law as it is set out in Northern Ireland would seem to include 'watching' activities such a stripteases and burlesque. The Courts are going to be busy

Well you've softened your position idependent
I don't mind paying more tax within reason, I think you setting the bar at people over 50K unreasonable since the high cost of living ie, childcare, rent, groceries in London for the lower end of this bracket is not 'rich' but actually probably struggling - in a single income family.

Okay I'm just going to be straight forward with you. I wasn't going to mention it as I didn't think it was necessary but I honestly think some of the narrowmindedness on this post is ridiculous.
I am an ex sex worker. I am from a middle class family, went to a grammar school and am currently training to be a nurse (I'm 30). Between the ages of 20-24 I escorted - not to fund an alcohol or drug habit, not because I was trafficked or forced into it.
YES - there are many situations whereby women are forced into it for whatever reasons (mainly Street workers), however take a trip to any brothel or speak to any escort, and the majority of them will be in the trade BY CHOICE. How many of you actually know a sex worker?? Or are you just making these assumptions from your high horse, as you think it's the "right" thing to do.
The place I worked was ran by a man (yes, the M word you all despise). He kept us safe, he vetted clients, they all had to pay by card and couldn't call of withheld numbers (to prevent anonymity). We worked with many other girls in an apartment, and we could refuse to see clients whenever we chose to. We each had our own boundaries in relation to what we were comfortable to do and it was fine. Yes the job had its bad points (but then I worked in care homes for 5 years cleaning up diarrhoea every hour and that had equal bad points), but it paid phenomenally and allowed me to save up and go travelling around the world. More than I could have done in any other job at that time of my life.
Anyway, do you know what happened? The business was busy by police as being a brothel, because as soon as more than one girl works out of a premises it is "illegal". What absolute bullsh*t. I left the trade after that, but God knows what the other girls would have then resorted to. Possibly many went independent, which is far more detrimental.
The bottom line is - yes there are huge issues with prostitution, but that's because it's still so taboo. People are able to remain anonymous in many situations (particularly with Street workers, who I admit are highly vulnerable and at risk), but if we can decriminalise it and accept that PEOPLE CAN CHOOSE HOW THEY USE THEIR BODIES, much to everyone else's dismay and judgement, then we can allow girls to work together, keep safe, vet and screen clients, and keep all the dodgy/violent punters out.

Oh and FYI - I have been physically and verbally abused more times than I care to count since working in care, and now training as a nurse. I have been threatened and genuinely worried for my safety at times. That was never the case when I was selling sex.

Independent - yes, as I said WHEN women are forced into it, that's a massive issue and should ABSOLUTELY be stopped. But making prostitution illegal forces it further underground where these dreadful accounts will continue.

Thanks Guardian. And obviously there is a complex argument about how tax allowances should be changed. But I think we sometimes need to remind ourselves how much the person serving us at a supermarket checkout is being paid. Generally around £7.50 an hour. They often don't have full time contracts and don't even get paid if they go off sick or have to look after sick children.

To put that in perspective, we're talking someone at most earning £900 a month. Can you live on £900 a month in 2017? Barely. So it's no surprise that some of these women might consider prostitution or web cam porn. Very generally speaking, the women on 50K a year don't have to consider prostitution or web cam porn.

I've noticed a determination not just among feminists but social progressives of all stripes to subtract economic class from their analysis.

pirate I have never once read on here that people think prostitutes themselves should be criminalised.
We are talking about criminalising the PUNTERS. I'm shouting because it keeps being ignored.

If it was a fine job, why did you stop doing it?

Independent I think I'm done with your argument. It is a massive resilience that is just going round in circles and has ceased to be productive.

Pirate thanks for sharing your experience and I am sorry if some of my theoretical standpoint denies your lived reality.

My position on this matter has changed in recent years. I used to believe that women have the freedom to choose what they do with their bodies and that the best response to prostitution is legalisation and harm reduction. However I am increasingly convinced that this doesn't work. In places where prostitution has been legalised it has increased trafficking and driven down prices without greatly improving working conditions. I also think the perception of our ability to make free choices unconstrained by our socalisation and circumstances is not the same as the reality.

It is difficult because there is a conflict between what is best in the short and long term. Legalisation may have a positive impact on some women working as prostitutes in the short term but I think it will have an overall negative impact on society.

What do you think about the Nordic model?

prostitution is (unless forced or trafficked) consensual. Therefore not rape. At all.

Well it's bordering on it. If a woman, due to the circumstances she finds herself in, feels she has no choice but to have sex with, then that is clearly not an equitable relation.

Completely agree. People who defend it seem to take the 'jaded worldview' defence - ie-

"all women have unwanted transactional sex, not just prostitutes, because all women are subordinate man-pleasers sexually, to survive and keep a roof over our heads, so prostitution is more honest".

So bleak, so demonstrably untrue.

Or the opposite 'sex utopia' worldview ie-

"isn't it amazing that women can make loads of money doing what they would be doing anyway (shagging random men) and come out of Uni without debt (but likely PTSD - but hey -let's not mention that)".

Which can't tackle the fact it is the buyer who is in control, he is the one that choses who he pays and what he gets. The prostitute can say 'I don't offer that service' if she likes, but the bloke can always take his money elsewhere or do 'stealthing' or such like.

The prostitute takes money for relinquishing her choice about what happens to her body and by whom (no matter what rituals or caveats or self-talk). That's the whole point.

Quentin - by criminalising punters, we are in turn criminalising the entire trade, don't be pedantic. If we said - it's not illegal to SELL chocolate, but it is illegal to BUY chocolate, what would happen do you think?? Of course it would push chocolate sales underground and there would be a black market for it.

It was never a long term career path for me - I used the opportunity to save money and went travelling, and when I returned I wanted to embark upon a "proper" career, hence my training now.
I didn't think it would work for me as I wanted to meet someone, settle down and have a family, and I just didn't see the two going hand in hand. Thays not to say it doesn't work for some women long term. I've met sex workers who have been in the trade for many years, have a partner and children (I currently volunteer for an organisation in my city which supports sex workers). There is also the lack of sick pay, holiday pay and pension which I wanted.

Pirate are you a friend of GenderEqualityAdvocate? Only like Lilac your story sounds like one of his friends - he kept going on about a friend becoming a nurse (as well as one who was pimped by her cousins at 14 but had no trouble with it).

Hi Tartle! I think the Nordic model is pretty much what we have in the UK anyway? We penalise the buyer, rather than the worker.
I actually really agree with you in regards the detrimental affect on society. Sadly we're living in a world where young men know that they can pay and get sex pretty much whenever, and however they want it. I do not think this is beneficial to our individuals or society as a whole.
I think much more education needs to go into relationships and building them so people acknowledge what is "normal" or not. The increase in children watching pornography is shocking (I wrote an essay on this in my second year of training), and people are becoming unable to get aroused now without the porn stimuli which is very concerning.
So I do think society as a whole needs to teach our young people about sex AND relationship education. But I don't think this suddenly equates to all sex workers being forced into it or victims.
One of my friends who worked in the sex industry used to work with a lot of physically disabled clients who sadly weren't able to experience a sexual relationship elsewhere. As much as people don't want to accept it - sex is a BASIC HUMAN NEED and if we look at Maslow's hierarchy it comes under the same category as food, shelter and sleep!
What are your veiws on providing a service to those unable to fulfill this need elsewhere? Alot of the clients I saw were older men, widowers, and young men from cultures and backgrounds which didn't allow them to have girlfriends before marriage. They were not seedy encounters. They were people who needed to fulfill basic needs of human contact, and I HONESTLY WAS treated with alot of respect and dignity (I know this goes against what people want to believe).

Hi Guardian, no that's not me, however it doesn't surprise me. Most of the girls I met when escorting were putting themselves through degrees at the time. Many also go into other forms of sex work too (stripping, webcamming, phone chat etc).

By the way Pirate you sound a very kind person, and I don'the think this is going to be a popular view, but I've always believed there are similar skills between carework/nursing and prostitution eg- the suppression of disgust, a reassuring bedside manner, giving of yourself to all clients/patients equally irrespective of whether they are likeable, or obnoxious or might become a friend. I believe that nurses/careworkers should be offered more to help with this extreme psychological wear and tear, because it is a lot to ask of a person.
But a big difference between carework/nursing and prostitution is that the former are actually necessary.

Thanks Guardian. And obviously there is a complex argument about how tax allowances should be changed. But I think we sometimes need to remind ourselves how much the person serving us at a supermarket checkout is being paid. Generally around £7.50 an hour. They often don't have full time contracts and don't even get paid if they go off sick or have to look after sick children.

perhaps in a small local supermarket. If you work for Tescos (I worked for Asda) you are paid at least minimum wage, sometimes with slight weighting for unsociable (but more convenient to me) hours (this is changing - my brother doesn't get sunday weighting for instance on his new contract). Sick pay, pension etc. is standard and required to be provided as it is in any job. I worked part time (but not zero hours contract - a proper, specified hours contract), my brother works full time, overtime was commonly available. After working there for 3 months I got my colleague card which gave me 10% off - ie. I could eat for free for one month a year!

It's hard work, but it's really not that bad - fixed breaks, staff canteen, money off food, guaranteed hours, overtime easily available etc. I switched to it from a sales job where my salary was much more variable due to a heavy commission component - I would go back to a job on the tills no problem if I needed to.

Guardian, thanks for your comments. I like to think I am a very kind, patient, fair and non judgemental person, and I feel that this is why I've done so well in my training (so far)! As I mentioned in a pp - sex is actually necessary, and according to Maslow's hierarchy of human need, it falls under the very basics of survival, along with food, water and shelter. I know alot of people don't want to accept it, but the only -physiological and biological reason we are on this planet is to copulate. It is such an intuitive and natural urge (although society would like us to suppress that with guilt).

Pirate, I agree that it's complicated. And you're right about pornography. Critics of industrialised sex disproportionately focus on prostitution. Although critical of porn, they tend to see it as something more abstracted. We need to widen our perception of the sex industry to encompass porn.

All I would say is that whatever motivations and experiences individual sex workers or buyers might have, women selling sex to men (or indeed anyone selling sex to anyone) is inherently morally and politically problematic.

I'm in favour of the Nordic model being trialed in order to convey the message that using prostitution is socially unacceptable. However, there are valid criticisms of the possibility of these women being driven into something worse. If they have the possibility of equally lucrative employment elsewhere then there isn't a problem, but most of them don't. Hence they are liable to move into another legal area of the sex industry like pornography or web-camming.

This is why any such change to the law should be accompanied by efforts to provide adequate employment and economic stability for these women elsewhere.

sex is a BASIC HUMAN NEED and if we look at Maslow's hierarchy it comes under the same category as food, shelter and sleep!
Why do you think there aren't so many women using prostitutes then? Do women have different "human" needs?

Choc Choc when you were working in the supermarket were you renting or paying a mortgage? Also did you have a partner who was working as well?

sex is actually necessary, and according to Maslow's hierarchy of human need
I beg to differ. Lots of people go years without sex without any ill effects. If a patient with open wounds is left laying in their own excrement, through lack of care/nursing, they will take a downturn very quickly.
(Of course you can't procreate without sex or ivf, but not everyone needs to procreate - think about how in much of the animal Kingdom only the dominant male gets to mate)

I can't believe that anyone actually takes Maslow's hierarchy seriously, never mind using it as a justification for exploitation! The depth of people's stupidity never ceases to amaze me

Hi pirate

Thanks for replying I think that you have made some very interesting points. I think the Nordic model is a little different to what we currently have which is a weird half and half model where soliciting and running a brothel are illegal but selling/buying sex isn't. I think this is a bit of a fence sitting positions that pretty much does no good to anyone.

I suppose the way I would like buying sex to be treated by society is the same as child abuse. Totally unacceptable and deviant and punishable by stringent legal and social consequences. (We could argue if child abuse is actually always treated in this way or not but I think we can agree that our attitudes as a society have changed greatly since the 1970s)

I totally agree that there is a link with the increasing pervasiveness and violence of porn and that this has huge implications for interpersonal relationships that I think is actually doing massive damage to the current generation.

I take your point on the way that paying for sex can be the only way that some men can access intimate relationships but I fundamentally disagree that sex is a basic human need so I do not see this as a justification for prostitution continuing. I have personally gone for many years without having sex and it has done me no harm. Similarly there is not a pool of male prostitutes providing sex for disabled women who are unable to find partners, they are not viewed as having this basic human need. It is just another sign of male entitlement.