Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Prostitution; help me argue on Facebook

676 replies

MrsTerryPratchett · 13/04/2017 20:56

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 Grin

OP posts:
GuardianLions · 01/05/2017 11:23

My bottom line is - in order to increase safety of sex workers it is IMPERATIVE that it is decriminalised and legislated

Well my bottom line is - in order to increase safety, equality and dignity of all women it is IMPERATIVE that punters are criminalised (whilst decriminalising soliciting and offering meaningful exist programmes for those in prostitution).

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 01/05/2017 11:24

Posted too soon. It is your stance that being a prostitute is "work" which is as important as providing basic human essentials like sleep, food and shelter.

Nobody needs to use a prostitute. There is no imperative for society to legislate for circumstances where it is easier to be or to use a prostitute.

PirateQueenie · 01/05/2017 11:27

Oh yeah and of course criminalising people stops them from doing things 😕 just look at drugs... Oh no it doesn't work at all! Just pushes the trade further underground endangering anyone and everyone involved.
Lass - don't argue with me, blame Maslow who's hierarchy is taught in all medical, healthcare and psychology/sociology degrees.

independentthinker21 · 01/05/2017 11:28

Well I've voluteered for two homeless charities and a food bank, and I'm a union rep at my place of work. I'm also writing a book which will probably never get published but might make a difference to how people think.

But yeah..fair point...what can any of us do really? Well, for what it's worth, we can vote - and I think that if we are feminists or claim to be people who care about social justice we should think very carefully about how the economic policies of presumptive political parties intersect with the things we claim to care about. I've met people who call themselves feminists but who vote Tory - which is insane. This identity politics which is very voguish at the moment abstracts these issues from material conditions. And I think that's bad.

Having said that, everyone should vote tactically in the next GE to get May out because she is going to do terrible damage.

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 01/05/2017 11:29

Vestal - sorry tell me more about how nurses aren't "real professionals" as we don't wear lab coats and goggles to clear up the diarrhoea of a c-diff patient....

Fairly certain Vestal would never have suggested nurses were not real professionals- what with the need for training and the fact they are doing a vital and essential job of benefit to the whole of society.

Neither of which apply to being a prostitute.

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 01/05/2017 11:32

Lass - don't argue with me, blame Maslow who's hierarchy is taught in all medical, healthcare and psychology/sociology degrees

How dare you tell me to not argue with you. The proposition that having sex is as basic a human need as sleep and food is patently ridiculous and you parrotting doesn't make it true.

PirateQueenie · 01/05/2017 11:33

Lass - I didn't say prostitution is a need equal to food water and shelter. Prostitute IS work however, it is a transaction of money for services. And sex is a basic human need. Otherwise what would you class it as? A luxury?

PirateQueenie · 01/05/2017 11:34

Haha wow that escalated quickly - I wasn't meaning "don't you argue with me" I meant it as in "don't shoot the messenger" because it isn't my theory - it's Maslow's hierarchy of human need.

venusinscorpio · 01/05/2017 11:36

Prostitute IS work however, it is a transaction of money for services.

On that basis you can say anything is "work". Being a drug dealer, a contract killer. Selling organs.

venusinscorpio · 01/05/2017 11:38

And sex is a basic human need. Otherwise what would you class it as? A luxury?

Yes. It is not a human right. If you don't have someone to have sex with, too bad.

PirateQueenie · 01/05/2017 11:38

Venus - Yes, that is all work too. I'm not saying it's all ethical or moral. But it is work.

PirateQueenie · 01/05/2017 11:38

Venus - didn't say human RIGHT, I said human NEED.

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 01/05/2017 11:39

And sex is a basic human need. Otherwise what would you class it as? A luxury?

Sex is not a basic human need other than for procreation. Of course it may be used for recreation but recreational sex is not a basic human need.

The theory you have quoted is one theory which suits you and which has been frequently criticised.

venusinscorpio · 01/05/2017 11:39

That's an interesting interpretation of work. Illegal activities are not the same as having a job.

TheSparrowhawk · 01/05/2017 11:40

If you genuinely believe that the risk of infection is greater for nurses than prostitutes you must be an idiot pirate. Have you never read any statistics? You do realise that prostitutes have more risk of STI infection than the rest of the population? And that 95% of HIV infection is through unprotected sex? In contrast the risk of contracting HIV as a healthcare worker is tiny.

The fantasy land in which punters are decent guys who wear condoms whenever they're asked doesn't exist.

venusinscorpio · 01/05/2017 11:41

Venus - didn't say human RIGHT, I said human NEED.

I know. I did. Where there are needs, there are rights. Which is a dodgy road to go down when it comes to having rights to use other people's bodies.

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 01/05/2017 11:41

On that basis you can say anything is "work". Being a drug dealer, a contract killer. Selling organs

Venus - Yes, that is all work too. I'm not saying it's all ethical or moral. But it is work

I am actually at a loss for words at this last comment.

independentthinker21 · 01/05/2017 11:42

ChocChoc it sounds like you're legitimising an unjust gap between the rich and poor by referring to individuals you know who are managing. Yes, of course people can get by on a suermarket wage. But why should they only get by? I had to work ten hour shifts with a thirty minute lunch break in order to survive. While people are working for a minimum wage the shareholders are creaming off millions for doing precisely fuck all. If that isn't exploitation I don't know what is.

This is the Tory ideology: 'I know someone who loves their low paid job and is perfectly happy' or 'I know someone who's worked their way up through hard graft - away with you whinging lefties'!

Sorry but it's such Daily Mail bollocks that as I say just serves to legitimise criminally unjust levels of inequality.

And I don't think working class people are living in misery just because they can't afford a house, but I believe that they should have the opportunity to buy a house if they want to. Don't you? Are you seriously saying that one class of people should be able to buy a house and another class shouldn't?

And it doesn't have to be a house. A population that predominantly rents is fine so long as the market is regulated as it is in many European countries so that people aren't giving upwards of a third of their income to landlords. There are literally garden sheds being rented out in Kensington by arseholes for £600 a month.

venusinscorpio · 01/05/2017 11:42

The theory you have quoted is one theory which suits you and which has been frequently criticised.

YY.

Tartle · 01/05/2017 11:44

Yeah I'd class it as a luxury. If I don't eat I will starve and die within a couple of weeks (maybe a bit longer, not sure? Couple of months tops!)

If I don't drink water I will die within a week.

If I don't have some form of shelter I would not survive the winter.

If I don't have clothing I will freeze in winter and burn in summer.

If I don't have sex for the rest of my life....

Absolutely nothing will happen.

Ok if we all did this then the human race would die out. But it is still not essential and in fact many societies find ways of restricting the people who can have sex for population control reasons or to control access to women

Just because Maslow wrote the table doesn't mean that we have to uncritically accept it. The very fact that Maslow was a man operating in a pre second wave context means that it's not surprising that he displays a male entitlement to sex in his theorising. Doesn't make it fact though.

VestalVirgin · 01/05/2017 11:44

because it isn't my theory - it's Maslow's hierarchy of human need

... and why should we agree with Maslow?
For all I know he was a man who also went to prostitutes and deluded himself that using prostitutes was a need for him.

I'd rather apply common sense to the situation. If millions of people can go without sex, then it is not a need.

If male humans needed to stick their dicks into women to remain healthy and happy, then monks wouldn't exist. They do exist and have a longer average lifespan than other men.

LassWiTheDelicateAir · 01/05/2017 11:45

The fantasy land in which punters are decent guys who wear condoms whenever they're asked doesn't exist

But Sparrowhawk It wouldn't be a fantasy if people like you and me would stop being so judgemental and realise Pirate was selflessly providing a basic human. We should be supporting legal brothels et al

PirateQueenie · 01/05/2017 11:46

Venus - the Oxford English dictionary definition of job - "A task or piece of work, especially one that is paid."

Sparrowhawk - unprotected sex is the highest reason for HIV transmission - true. However this is anal sex, not protected vaginal sex. Also, if women CHOOSE to risk their health for money, I'm sorry but who are you to say they can't?? Their body, their choice.
I did a lot of work with HIV patients as part of my degree and I met people involved with some seriously risky behaviours (way more risky than prostitution). They chose to carry out these lifestyle habits and although I struggled to understand it, it was their choice. We don't have a say over how other people use their bodies. We can try and make things safer for people, but if they're going to do it, they're going to do it.

GuardianLions · 01/05/2017 11:47

Oh yeah and of course criminalising people stops them from doing things 😕 just look at drugs... Oh no it doesn't work at all! Just pushes the trade further underground endangering anyone and everyone involved.
This is a massive sweeping statement that is regurgitated over and over again by the pro-lobby.

People have given lots of examples of how you can massively reduce, without entirely eradictating something through criminalisation , but it is still worth it (eg smoking in the workplace, drink-driving, etc).

With drugs it doesn't make sense. How are people more harmed by making them illegal? I know that people speak about the rise of the MAFIA during the prohibition and the links of criminal gangs with any criminal activity.

But there are now and will continue to be gangsters (and 'would be' gangsters) who seek to make their money through illegal means. It really is a get rich quick thing. Drugs, human trafficking/prostitution and weapons are the most lucrative trade I think still. Legalising won't get rid of the ilegal trade in anything where gangsters can make their money.

I don't see how else being illegal makes drugs more dangerous. Being cut with other substances perhaps - but I don't think you need to legalise to have a harm-minimisation approach - like those safety MDMA srations in the Netherlands.

PirateQueenie · 01/05/2017 11:50

"With drugs it doesn't make sense. How are people more harmed by making them illegal?"
You are joking right? Well for one if recreational drugs were legal and monitored we could make sure the ingredients are safe and not cut with dangerous alternatives...