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

If robotic women, indistinguishable from human women but without any consciousness, worked as prostitutes would you be opposed to it?

If there are jobs which are too dangerous, or boring or degrading or damaging for people to do by all means invent machines to do them but machines which look like machines not facsimiles of humans.

If someone wants to pay to masturbate into R2D2 , fine.

Oh and trot off with the nonsense that all paid work is prostitution.

Prostitution doesn't just devalue the women who do it - an ex prostitute (she must be ex) is not considered a catch as a wife by most men - it devalues all women in the eyes of the men that use them.
It also promotes arguments such as 'paid work is a form of prostitution'.

^ how difficult is it to understand this?

If robotic women, indistinguishable from human women but without any consciousness, worked as prostitutes would you be opposed to it?

This very concept illustrates the 'value' of prostitutes.

I'm really disappointed that this discussion isn't about the women who work as prostitutes but the morality of paying for sex. None of you really care about the women, whether they're being harmed or enjoy what they do. You only care about the principle of men paying for sex, which you insist is wrong without justification.

This very concept illustrates the 'value' of prostitutes.

It certainly makes a lie of the many "happy hooker" and punter stories of men who just want "some human company" doesn't it?

If men want to spend money to wank into something, might I suggest a fleshlight rather than a human or a human facsimile. Or they could give a few quid to the charity of their choice each time they wank using their hands.

Prostituted women are being harmed. They more likely to have STDs, PTSD is common, and very many start when they are underage.

Prostitution harms women.

If men didn't pay for sex, there would be no prostitution. Men Paying For Sex Harms Women.

Prostitution doesn't just devalue the women who do it - an ex prostitute (she must be ex) is not considered a catch as a wife by most men - it devalues all women in the eyes of the men that use them.

Should we prohibit promiscuity and putting on fat as well? Men don't want to marry those sort of women.

If men want to spend money to wank into something, might I suggest a fleshlight rather than a human or a human facsimile.

You obviously have a complete inability to empathise with men. Men aren't like women, they require the female form to masturbate. Are you offended by inflatable dolls? What about the use of imagination to 'view' naked women?

It sounds like prostitution isn't the issue here. You don't like biology and the way it shapes society.

Today 10:57 user1492155021

I'm really disappointed that this discussion isn't about the women who work as prostitutes but the morality of paying for sex. None of you really care about the women, whether they're being harmed or enjoy what they do. You only care about the principle of men paying for sex, which you insist is wrong without justification.

Lol.

You got it! That's the very basis of feminism. Feminists are always more concerned about men than women. Shrewd.

You obviously have a complete inability to empathise with men.

They might as well wear badges.

Should we prohibit promiscuity and putting on fat as well? Men don't want to marry those sort of women

I could not care less whether someone is promiscuous or not. As long as the participants are adult, not cheating, not carrying an SDT and last but not least freely consenting it is none of my business.

Your last sentence is very telling of your mindset. I don't think the number of previous partners / encounters much matters to most people.

Is there some sort of bat signal goes out every time this topic comes up?

You obviously have a complete inability to empathise with men.

I'll let my DH know, he'll be enthralled.

Men aren't like women, they require the female form to masturbate.

This has been disproven so many times, I don't even know where to start.

Are you offended by inflatable dolls?

No, but I reserve the right to think the type of men who use them to masturbate into as a bit weird.

What about the use of imagination to 'view' naked women?

You mean, like a "wank bank"? You do know that women often fantasise during sex as well, yes?

It sounds like prostitution isn't the issue here. You don't like biology and the way it shapes society.

If you mean the way that women have been oppressed for centuries because of their perceived ability to bear young, then yes, you're right, I don't like the way female biology has shaped society for women. I do hope you're not still banging the drum for the "men neeeed nekkid ladies in order to ejaculate" because it's bunkum.

user14921 - I refer you to my earlier post.

I assume you're a prostitute, or ex-prostitute yourself?

LassWiTheDelicateAir - you said one of the problems with prostitution is that men don't want to marry ex-prostitutes. Now you say you don't think it's a problem for women to be promiscuous? So what actually is your point? Why do you care who men want to marry?

I'm not questioning the harm caused to women by prostitution, most of them are probably desperate drug addicts who had no choice but to sell sex. I'm questioning your opposition to paying for sex per se, even with hypothetical "robots" incapable of being harmed! The implication is that you don't care if prostitutes are harmed or not, you just don't like the idea of men paying for sex.

Ok, well let's look at the type of man who pays for sex then.

Do you think those men are good men? Caring men? Men who care about women?

I welcome a discussion about the type of man who would do this. I think it would be illuminating to discuss what kind of person would pay to masturbate into another human being in the clear knowledge that that other human might well be "desperate drug addicts with no choice but to sell sex", or trafficked, or a child, or mentally ill.

The implication is that you don't care if prostitutes are harmed or not, you just don't like the idea of men paying for sex.

This is the mental detachment that is crucial to the justification of prostitution. Separating the buyer from the seller.

Men who use prostitutes are sexually incontinent low-lifes.

Prostitutition would not exist without them.

A). I'm not questioning the harm caused to women by prostitution

B). you just don't like the idea of men paying for sex

A is caused by B.

HTH.

MrsTerryPratchett, perhaps the ethics of prostitution are irrelevant. The law and morality rarely align. We do things because we must, not because its 'right'.

Criminalising prostitution may cause more harm than good. Alternatively, criminalising prostitution (infringing the rights of happy prostitutes) may be more utilitarian.

We have three options:

A) To criminalise all prostitution, regardless of whether the women enjoy it or not.
B) To criminalise only prostitution which harms women and permit that which doesn't.
C) To permit all prostitution, regardless of the harm inflicted on women.

Which goal is more attainable? Does option A, B or C inflict the least harm on women/society?

Lol. You can't help but admire someone who provides the solution to prostitution being three different types of prostitution.

d) Criminalize the buying of sex, help the women doing it out of desperation out of poverty.

Women who are happily doing it by choice can always have sex for free, and this way they're not sacrificing poor and vulnerable women for their own benefit.

What ratio of damaged prostitutes to happy prostitutes makes it OK? What ratio makes it unacceptable?

TheDowagerCuntess - please explain how paying for sex is intrinsically harmful to women? We've already established that it's at least theoretically possible that a woman might enjoy and not be harmed by working as a prostitute.

Who cares what sort of men use prostitutes. Who cares what sort of men hijack planes and fly them into buildings. The fact is they exist and aren't going away, so we have to accept that and deal with it.

The fact is they exist and aren't going away, so we have to accept that and deal with it.

Why?

user it is disturbing that there is a male demand for fuck-dolls either that are robotic and look like women, or real human women in the form of prostitutes and unwilling victims of sex crimes.

The fact that a contingent of males feel entitled to fuck women (children/animals) as though their conscious experience of what is happening doesn't matter, eg whether they feel fear, pain, boredom, sadness, while they are being fucked, is of concern to all women (and children and animals for that matter).

The attitudes and sense of sexual entitlement of these men can be harmful both within and outside prostitution and should not be validated or encouraged by normalising prostitution, for the sake of anyone who does not want to be used as a fuck-doll. Geddit?

LassWiTheDelicateAir - you said one of the problems with prostitution is that men don't want to marry ex-prostitutes.

I did not say that.

By "criminalise" I meant prevent. I didn't mean send the women to jail.

ChocChocPorridge - d) Criminalize the buying of sex, help the women doing it out of desperation out of poverty.

This would come under option A. It's already being done in Sweden and puts women in more danger.