Prostitution / Pornography/ Surrogacy.

[Cismyfatarse1]

Help!

DS who is ridiculously clever, 18 and knows everything has been, along with DD (16) (Alsoclever but prepared to admit to not knowing everything) arguing amicably with me on and off all day.

Both of them were arguing that women should be free to choose to be prostitutes / porn stars / rent out their wombs.

I disagreed vehemently because we can't have laws that allow exploitation of the most vulnerable. Plus, these (particularly the first two) make women commodities for men.

Any clear arguments I can use? Links? Sources.

DS - who is gay - didn't see that if prostitution was so desirable a job, then men would do it. He also didn't see that consent is not really consent if you are vulnerable or being groomed / exploited. His life has been quite comfy. DD - no real life experience, didn't get that, as women, we are often seen as vessels for carrying / entering and that a penis in your mouth / cunt / bum is very different from just being physically close with someone who you don't fancy.

Both of them insisted that porn is watched by lots of women and that porn star is a desirable job for some and that porn stars are safe.

I gave it my all but really do want them to SEE!! Their generation, they argue, is not uptight about sex so selling it is no big deal.

Thoughts?

And unless tom goes completely off piste i agree with whatever he and pink say moving forward on this thread

*I'm single, but if I was in a relationship... faking it is one thing, but if my hypothetical partner actually disliked what I was doing, or found it painful, I would like to think that she would tell me.

If I can trust a sex worker to tell me they dislike something (and they always do) then surely I could trust a partner to tell me the same.*

You're not understand my point.
My point is that some sex workers dare not tell you they do not like it because their pimp will hurt them more then you will. That might not be the case in some high class escort service, but it IS the case further down the chain.

Let me spell it out. She will say 'yes I love anal sex' because she needs your money. If it hurts, she will not always tell you because it does not hurt as much as not having any money. And even if you can somehow detect when you are doing something she does not like... the man who visits her right after you may not give a damn, and he will hurt her even when she's begging him to stop.

It's not a nice industry. You can pull out examples of women who haven't suffered much (or at all), but for every one of those there will be 20 others who have. 'On the whole' porn and prostitution do nothing to advance equality for women, they only help to maintain inequality.

Its not all about you

That's exactly what I said.

I did say "I wouldnt do this or i wouldnt do that"

Which means it isn't all about me... which is what I said.

And another point goes shooting over your head

Something like 80% of homeless people are men. If a man finds himself destitute, he will usually have no choice but to grab a sleeping bag and be on the streets. For woman, a lot of the time (from my experience of working with homeless people) they will turn to sex work, in the form of stripping or prostitution.
I agree with the Nordic model and think it is the safest solution. I don’t think criminalising these woman is the answer. I don’t think anyone should be in a position that they have to choose but sadly the world isn’t perfect, and if a woman decides she wishes to make money from sex work as opposed to sleeping on the street - by punishing her we are effectively punishing the poor.
Surrogacy should never be something poor people do for rich people. I would do it for my sister in a heartbeat but it should all be about choice.
Porn is never going to disappear, the issue is not porn making people do this and that. The issue is people not being sufficiently educated by their parents/teachers about sex. If they think gang bangs and buccake is normal sex, someone’s failed somewhere and to blame it on the porn industry is another example of lazy education and parenting.

Any form of abuse will indirectly harm their ability to generate income. If they have food, and they're happy, and not being harmed... then in what way are they being abused?

They can be abused in non physical ways, or non-visible ways.
Firstly in most studios ALL their conversations are monitored, and so they are not at liberty to actually be 100% honest. Secondly, many of their circumstances force them to do the work, which yes, they choose to do, but they rapidly become trapped in a rut and find it difficult to escape. Their pay can be withheld, their terms and conditions altered and many are not able to contest it because they keep their work secret from family etc.
You simply cannot trust a woman on a webcam to tell you the truth. She may be honest, she may not be, but you will never know as long as you're paying her and she's operating with bosses looking over her shoulder.

I readily accept some will be happy doing what they do - but it's still supporting a wider industry that harms women, and you can never be 100% sure if a woman's truly happy doing it or not.

I agree with the Nordic model and think it is the safest solution.

Why criminalise the clients when the majority of sex workers have said they don't want their clients to be arrested?

Secondly, many of their circumstances force them to do the work, which yes, they choose to do, but they rapidly become trapped in a rut and find it difficult to escape.

The issue there is poverty, not sex work.

1.) Sex workers experience high levels of sexual violence. Globally, sex workers have a 45 to 75% chance of experiencing sexual violence at some point in their careers and a 32 to 55% chance of experiencing sexual violence in a given year.

2.) Sexual assault against individuals engaged sex work (especially criminalized forms of sex work) in the United States is also high. In Phoenix, AZ 37% of prostitution diversion program participants report being raped by a client, and 7.1% report being raped by a pimp. In Miami, FL, 34% of street-based sex workers reported violent encounters with clients in the past 90 days. In New York, 46% of indoor sex workers reported being forced to do something by a client that they did not want to do, and over 80% of street-based sex workers experienced violence.

3.) One in five police reports of sexual assault from an urban, U.S. emergency room were filed by sex workers. Sex workers were younger, poorer and suffered a greater number of injuries than other victims.

source: www.huffingtonpost.com/katherine-koster/16-facts-about-sexual-ass_b_8711720.html?guccounter=1

My comment about 'give me one happy shiny sex worker and I'll show you 20 abused ones' was a turn of phrase, but I do not think it's particularly wide of the mark.

How do you square the fact that the more you do it the more the chances of you contributing to someones abuse get closer to 1:1? I mean sure I don't know where the precise ratio of happy hookers/ desperate abuse victims is, nobody does exactly. But unless you believe NO women are suffering in prostitution then the fact is you might be able to get away with doing it once or twice without causing harm, but the more you do it you come to the inescapable fact that yours becomes one of the indelible faces that will continue to haunt some poor woman for the rest of her life.

If you can do the mental maths and come to the conclusion it doesn't matter or it's worth the risk, then fine, but I reserve the right to think you're ultimately a callous unfeeling bastard, and view anything you say with the deepest suspicion as you are always going to place your orgasms ahead of the wellbeing of other people.

Look I'm no great ally of feminism, BUT I don't like to see people suffer so please kindly jog on unless you have something useful to add.

The solution to violence is improved safety. Allowing sex workers to work indoors in groups, improved screening of clients, and improved surveillance of clients would all reduce violence. Note that your statistics sometimes refer to "street-based" workers. No sex worker should be wandering around streets on their own.

strange how torn did not answer the question about high class hookers and whether or not they are desperate.
I guess that does not fit in with the echo chamber narrative.

There is no narrative. High class hookers being desperate? You're trying to legitimise an industry by finding examples where exploitation seems less likely, or doesn't exist. You might as well be arguing that there aren't starving children in some nations because there are also fat folks eating well in that country

Nobody has said every woman (or man) is coerced. Nobody has said some might actually the sex, can choose their clients and get well paid for it. Not one person has said that cannot happen.

What I have said is that the existence of such people does not undermine the fact that the majority are not doing it for the joy of it, they are not doing it because it's well rewarded, they ARE doing it because they feel it's their only option - and as a result of that, they are frequently exploited and abused.

Putting a glamour facia on a predominantly shitty industry doesn't make it smell or look any sweeter.
Saying 'I wouldn't make a prostitute do anything she didn't want to' doesn't stop prostitutes being raped.
Saying 'what about the high class call girls who seemingly love their jobs' - they love the rewards, they might be fortunate enough to be able to choose clients they don't detest. Even the majority of high class call girls would probably rather have the money without having to endure the sex.

And yes, there will be some examples of folks who just like casual sex, and would do it for free - so getting paid is a bonus? what does that prove? - nothing.

strange how torn did not answer the question about high class hookers and whether or not they are desperate

I guess that does not fit in with the echo chamber narrative

I'm not sure what the question was but I have already said whether or not a woman was coerced makes no difference to my objection to prostitution.

The high class hookers a la Brooke Magnani are part of the problem. It is generally taken on here that one should not criticise prostituted women but I step out of line here. The Belle de Jours facilitate and try to normalise being a prostitute as just being another job. They aren't quite in the same league as pimps and punters but they are part of the problem.

So what you're advocating is...

A nicer environment for you to fuck a woman as part of a financial transaction, and providing there's no physical harm to her, it's gotta be ok?
Why not have a wank at home, go and pay her for 1 hour and let her take a break? I'll tell you why, because you're putting your physical needs first. You care about you first, her second (if at all).

You're ultimately trying to justify why a wank is doing her a favour by giving her employment in the process. Very good of you.

How do you square the fact that the more you do it the more the chances of you contributing to someones abuse get closer to 1:1? I mean sure I don't know where the precise ratio of happy hookers/ desperate abuse victims is, nobody does exactly. But unless you believe NO women are suffering in prostitution then the fact is you might be able to get away with doing it once or twice without causing harm, but the more you do it you come to the inescapable fact that yours becomes one of the indelible faces that will continue to haunt some poor woman for the rest of her life.

You mean get closer to "1." In statistics, "1" is certainty.

But the answer is simple; I screen the women I visit. When I find them online, I check how their profile is written, and I ensure the women I am visiting are well-established independent sex workers.

It's very easy to spot bad profiles. If the profile has a fake photograph, is offering extreme services (unprotected sex, for example), and is a new profile with no client feedback, then it's more likely (but not certain) to be (a) dangerous for myself, if I get mugged by a group of men, for example or (b) an exploited women. So I avoid those profiles and stick to women with an established reputation.

I don't like to see people suffer

I agree with that, which is why I take care to ensure I'm not harming anyone.

And the solution to violence is for men to stop violating women.
It's not to 'police it better'.

I don't disagree that since men can't / won't stop being violent, that better policing is needed, but that's not really a solution, it's a measure in reduction.

And yes I know male prostitutes suffer too - again at the hands of men, predominantly.

And yes, there will be some examples of folks who just like casual sex, and would do it for free - so getting paid is a bonus? what does that prove? - nothing

I don't actually believe this happens. I had loads of casual sex in my late teens/early 20s. There is a myth perhaps that being willing to have casual sex must involve applying no discrimination about who with. Oddly I never had sex with any man having any of these characteristics- smelly, fat, short, bald, sweaty, grubby, badly dressed or boring, or if I'm being honest in a lower- socio-economic class.

You are disgusting pj

Sick of pathetic men like you, thinking you have the right to fuck unwilling women for money, and claim you're doing no harm. What kind of person has sex with someone who doesn't fancy them? You make my skin crawl.

Nah, it's your needs first and foremost - your need for the physical stimulation. That is the driving force.
Her 'rules' are just the boundaries you need to operate in to meet your need.
If you didn't have that initial need, you wouldn't be visiting her.

You have a need - she fulfils it with conditions.
Her need is the money, and you fulfil her need.

The key difference being - it would be better for you if you could have your needs met for free and it would be better for her to get the money without having to have the sex.