What is the moral difference between sex work and other forms of work?

[MooFeatures]

Hear me out. I know the two are different, and that and that a person selling their body (indeed, their consent) for sex is morally different to other types of work which they wouldn’t engage in if that financial incentive (coercion?) wasn’t present. I’m not questioning this position... I’d just like to be able to fully articulate why the two are different. All explanations gratefully received

The vast vast majority of men are perfectly well able to masturbate.

I'd also point out that the idea of enthusiastic consent is used to advise people, particularly men, what they need to see in a partner. It's not enough for the partner to agree, or to avoid acting like an ass, to be sure the consent is valid, it has to be enthusiastic.

Yes! It's to try to explain that nagging and nagging until she caves isn't "consent". That emotional blackmail isn't consent.

How is that supposed to be a workable standard? How do you know if someone is enthusiastic, or they don't have mixed motives for agreeing to have sex with you?

When the person consenting gives their informed consent freely without pressure and continues to actively participate in the sex act, that's a strong indication of a reasonable degree of enthusiasm.

The vast vast majority of men are perfectly well able to masturbate.

I bet you've just given a few the idea.

The idea of aiming for enthusiastic consent isn’t an attempt to gain magical psychic powers to read women’s minds, it’s just a standard to ensure sex is wanted, satisfying and enjoyable for all parties. In addition your way way less likely to be accused of rape that way if that’s your standard.

Dervel yes this, with one minor clarification: In addition your way way less likely to be accused of rape that way if that’s your standard because you won't commit a rape to be accused of.

To the person earlier objecting to my use of the word "slavery" when I was not talking specifically about transatlantic slavery of blacks.

wiktionary. slavery: "An institution or social practice of owning human beings as property"

Merriam-Webster: "a : the practice of slaveholding. b : the state of a person who is a chattel of another" (and in case chattel is confusing, from the same dictionary, chattel: "an item of tangible movable or immovable property except real estate").

Oxford English: "a person who is the legal property of another."

Check out how recently we still had coverture. Check out reviews by punters pissed off at prostitutes not doing exactly what they're told and liking it because he's paid them and so he owns them. The punters' words. Check out the huge swathes of the world where women still can't own anything because they don't exist as legal persons. Only their fathers or husbands do.

The transatlantic slave trade of blacks was an atrocious subset of the whole class. But if you look, it's hideously easy to find every example of horrific treatment repeated in the current, not historical, treatment of too many women.

(I sort of want to do the social media thing of saying, go on, look it up, I'll wait. But I won't. Wait, that is. Every example of the weird obliviousness to the ongoing treatment of women that slaps me in the face like a cold dead fish, the more impatient I get.)

@BeetrootRocks prostitution can't be legalised as then no one could do it because of health and safety laws is also interesting That is simply untrue, where prostitution is deriminalised health and safety of prostitutes is good. The decriminalization of prostitution is associated with better coverage of health promotion programs for sex workers. here

The fact that decrim is always suggested by supporters is an admission that it's on no way the same as 'any other job at the moment prostitution is treated differently than other job and bound by all sorts of restrictions that other jobs are not (such as where it is carried out, restrictions on working together etc.). Part of the point of decriminalization is that it should be treated legally as any other job.

Using the dictionary definition for something when making an argument is like using it when writing a wedding speech; no-one likes it and it doesn’t help anyone.

It’s really very simple:

Have women been enslaved in the (recent) past: Yes

Are some women enslaved now: Yes

Does the very act of being a prostitute, or selling sex, make you a slave? Absolutely not. Is it a fair comparison? No it isn’t.

Men leaving reviews on websites saying they felt that they owned women they paid to sleep with is one thing - but they’re complaining that she didn’t do what they wanted. Do you think real slaves get to not do what their owner wants?

If a woman decides to become a prostitute and have sex for money, is it bad? Yes, I personally think it is, and a bad idea, and bad for society. But it doesn’t automatically make her a slave or enslaved and saying it does devalues and makes light of people who’ve had to endure real slavery, in the same way that throwing around the word ‘Holocaust’ or ‘massacre’ or ‘ethnic cleaning’ in situations which absolutely aren’t that, is offensive (to me). That’s my take on it anyway.

exponential The Nordic Model is associated with better health provision and reduced serious violence towards prostituted women because the punters know that one word from the woman and the police will pull them in for two offences, not one, namely using a prostitute and battering her.

Part of the point of decriminalization is that it should be treated legally as any other job.

So please explain to me how a prostituted woman can work safely taking a punter's dick into her mouth, anus, or vagina when my dentist wears a cap, goggles, surgical mask, surgical gloves, disposable apron, and scrub outfit just to look inside my mouth? Condoms don't compare to what healthcare workers put on, and the healthcare workers don't even intend to end up with semen in contact with them. Read the blood-borne viruses in the workplace guide from HSE and tell me how a prostituted woman can do her "job" whilst being adequately protected.

Does the very act of being a prostitute, or selling sex, make you a slave? Absolutely not. Is it a fair comparison? No it isn’t.

Lots are trafficked and detained illegally, so many are enslaved.

I completely understand why the conversation has diverged into a legal mire, but the original topic was what is the moral difference between sex work and other forms of work.

Most of what follows seems to be focused on a legal utilitarian perspective which doesn’t necessarily help identifying the morality of the situation.

So let’s get back to basics is sex work morally wrong? Yes I think fundamentally it is as it causes harm, of multiple kinds. First of all it can harm the individual woman (and occasional man) who works within it both in terms of their physical and psychological health. Second and by no means less significant it also causes harm to society as a whole wherein it encourages and promotes 50% of the population to objectify and dehumanise the other 50% of the population. It is of course not the only cultural aspect of our society that does this thus it may be difficult to parse out precisely how responsible it is in a wider context, but it is definitely part of that landscape.

Now then I guess how do this compare with other kinds of work? Obviously not as many professions directly objectify women as literal sex objects, and plenty of other jobs can cause harm, but overall the rest of the world of work is on average safer than being a prostitute, although perhaps being an online sex worker is safer than working in other directly dangerous jobs.

Going back to the law I often hear the argument around legalising prostitution that it will happen anyway and there is no effective way to police it. The exact same argument could be said of domestic violence should we just not bother with crimes against women entirely then?

Does the very act of being a prostitute, or selling sex, make you a slave? Absolutely not. Is it a fair comparison? No it isn’t.

If the ninety and nine are enslaved why is it that pornstitution advocates only focus on the exceptional few? We know why.

By bringing into disrespect and potential danger others recognisably within the same definition. e.g. that person is a dwarf/a woman; some dwarves/ some women, will accept being degraded; therefore this dwarf/ this woman, is a suitable creature for being disrespected.
Prostitution/dwarf throwing, colludes with the idea women/ dwarves, are less than equal human beings. It hurts all dwarves if some agree to be thrown around in 'dwarf throwing' for amusement of some drunks. It hurts all their sisterhood when some women agree to sell access to their bodies.

Exponential you don't understand the difference between decriminalisation and legalisation.

So you haven't been able to understand my point.

bd67thSaysReinstateLangCleg The Nordic Model is associated with better health provision and reduced serious violence towards prostituted women
Er no that article was thoroughly deconstructed as a distortion here and decriminalisation has been shown to be better all round for prostitutes, see this systematic review Associations between sex work laws and sex workers’ health: A systematic review and meta-analysis of quantitative and qualitative studies here

So please explain to me how a prostituted woman can work safely…. Ever heard of a risk assessment? Many prostitutes take great care of their sexual health and get tested regularly the risk of contracting an STI is probably less than picking up some random in a bar.
It is a favourite trope of abolitionists to say that for sex to be safe you need to wear full PPE. In fact decriminalisation as operated in New South Wales (Australia) and in New Zealand gives the best health outcomes here

That Feminist Cuurent article is excellent, thanks for sharing bd67thSaysReinstateLangCleg. exponential's counter link is unconvincing, it grab at spurious suggestions and makes guesses not supported by the pro-deciminalization organization's own research.

"the risk of contracting an STI is probably less than picking up some random in a bar."

No one suffers more sexually-transmitted diseases than prostitutes, your glib dismissal of the severe health consequences prostitutes are forced by men to endure and potentially die from is an offensive lie.

'Many prostitutes take great care of their sexual health and get tested regularly the risk of contracting an STI is probably less than picking up some random in a bar'

Many? How many? Link please. Global if poss but UK will do.

The point of health and safety is to prevent. Testing is after the event.

How is testing after the event equivalent to prevention?

You still haven't addressed your mix up re decrim Vs legalisation.

And what is the picking up men in bars comment even about? Interesting comparison.

No one suffers more sexually-transmitted diseases than prostitutes, your glib dismissal of the severe health consequences prostitutes are forced by men to endure and potentially die from is an offensive lie.

It's easy to be glib about things that you'll never have to worry about yourself. As TheB said, there's a reason why fans of the sex industry focus on the 1%.

BeetrootRocks Many? How many? Link please. Global if poss but UK will do

Well here you go. A review article The epidemiology of sexually transmitted infections in the UK: Impact of behavior, services and interventions here on p43 there is a section on prostitutes Sex workers (SWs) are often considered to be at particular risk of STIs, although in England, female SWs attending GUM clinics are only at marginally higher risk of an STI than other female attendees see also The sexual health of female sex workers compared with other women in England : analysis of cross-sectional data from genitourinary medicine clinics here.
Interestingly migrant prostitutes are in better sexual health than home grown-possibly reflecting the fact that they mostly work indoors and not on the street.

Of course in the UK sex work is legal but hedged round with such restrictions as to make legal work technically impossible. In the decriminalised environment of Sydney NSW Australia where health outreach etc is good a survey of sexual health of prostitutes The Sex Industry In New South Wales a Report To The NSW Ministry of Health here says p 23 among the 140 participants in Sydney who were tested for four common STis – chlamydia, gonorrhoea, trichomoniasis, and Mycoplasma genitalium infection – the prevalence of these conditions was at least as low as would be found in women in the general population despite their high numbers of sexual partners at work, prevalences are kept low by the consistent use of condoms and regular STi screening

You still haven't addressed your mix up re decrim Vs legalisation not at all you are confused. Legalisation means that the government sets special laws giving conditions under which prostitution is allowable-these might involve licensing of prostitutes-requiring them to register where they can operate etc. Decriminalisation does not mean there are no laws, it means there are no prostitution specific laws-but normal things like employment law, health and safety and so on apply equally to prostitution as to any other business.

Many prostitutes take great care of their sexual health and get tested regularly the risk of contracting an STI is probably less than picking up some random in a bar

Is it the responsibility of the NHS to use up resources like this- i.e regular testing and treatment of prostitutes

By bringing into disrespect and potential danger others recognisably within the same definition. e.g. that person is a dwarf/a woman; some dwarves/ some women, will accept being degraded; therefore this dwarf/ this woman, is a suitable creature for being disrespected.
Prostitution/dwarf throwing, colludes with the idea women/ dwarves, are less than equal human beings. It hurts all dwarves if some agree to be thrown around in 'dwarf throwing' for amusement of some drunks. It hurts all their sisterhood when some women agree to sell access to their bodies

That's an excellent comparison.

Are there no trafficked prostitutes and criminal gangs pimping them out in Australia anymore?

Pertella Are there no trafficked prostitutes and criminal gangs pimping them out in Australia anymore?
From the report cited above here p9 criminalisation may exacerbate opportunities for coercion and exploitation by encouraging sex workers to seek the protection of pimps and criminals.There is no evidence that criminalisation reduces the incidence of prostitution and the Australian public no longer see it as a preferred option and p22 in Australia as a whole, pimping has not been a significant feature of the sex industry for decades. ……since the legal reforms in 1979 sex workers in nsw have had no use for pimps. notably, the lash study found no evidence that any of the women had been coerced into working in a brothel
Also p11 The LASH team found no evidence of recent trafficking of female sex workers in the Sydney brothel survey or in a clinic study This was in marked contrast to the 1990s when contacted women from Thailand were common in Sydney
So the answer to your question is it appears not in the decriminalised environment of NSW..

Thank you, DidoL

Well there you have it silly feminists, prostituted women are healthier, happier, and less prone to male violence than other women, especially immigrant prostitutes.

Truly if we cared about trafficked women and children of all sorts we should encourage them to leave the maquiladoras, the sweatshops, the farms, and the domestic servitude breaking them down and learn from hookers down under to enter themselves into the perfectly balanced free market of Oz-style whoring.

Saw this posted today;