So, the sex "work" "debate"

[FizzyDizzy121]

Having looked through a lot of older threads here, I'm asking for some help.

Do you have a DP or family member that you fundamentally disagree with on a topic as black and white (to me) as sex "work"?

In my younger years, I was very much in favour of choice feminism, including in areas such as prostitution. I believed that the pushback was motivated by our issues around sex and that if a woman (usually) wants to run a business that way, supply and demand right? I did argue for better protections, H&S involvement etc.

Now, my whole approach changed a few years back. Buying consent makes me very, very uneasy and I would argue is a form of coercion/distress rather than freely given. Men (usually) who "visit" prostitutes are having sex with someone they KNOW wouldn't have sex with them if there wasnt money involved which is dodgy on so many grounds.
And all that is before we get to the amount of assaults, trafficking etc involved.

My DP is pretty left leaning (as am I) and views all work as unjust. Humans shouldn't have to be coerced to do labour in order to pay for essentials like shelter or food. And he sees sex "work" as within this bracket. Its exploitation but not any different than a retail worker for example. He says he'd be happy for his relative to be involved in sex "work", he argues the money changing hands is not buying the woman but the labour of the woman (I.e. the sex) for a set amount of time.

How do you respond to such thinking? Does it impact show you think of the other person?

Any thoughts/comments gratefully received

If you readPaid Forby Rachel Moran she said that she never did anal sex. This is important because people say that a prostitute has to do everything the man wants

Did Rachel Moran work in holbeck? Is she representative of all prostitutes? Have you been to talk to any street workers and asked them if they do whatever the punter wants?

@chickenyhead
Can you tell me which EU study? I can't find what you're referring to. If it's the one by Syvia Walby I've read it and have a lot to say about it.

And where is the table you posted? What page is it on?

I think that allowing women to work together for safety is a damn good idea, not criminalizing the punters. In Ireland where they introduced the Nordic model a couple of years ago they haven't improved the social security safety net and they don't have good support for exit. Instead they doubled the penalties for brothel-keeping, which affects women in their 20s like the 2 Romanian women who were in the news.

@Gurufloof
I have met women who spend £200 a day on crack cocaine and £100 a day on heroin. I asked one about pimps and she looked puzzled and said they don't have them. I have since learned that pimps are associated with indoor prostitution. If a man has a flat and a phone he can set himself up as a pimp. For street based sex workers they don't have someone to find punters for them, they do that on the street (or in this case, the Common). They give their money to the drug dealer, not a pimp.

Which is why it was odd that the Nursing Times said that one of the 10 interviewees had pimps. Also that several were of Caribbean extraction. I met one black woman called Jodie who had a northern accent and an African girl called Destelle.

It was very limited what they did. They would pull their jeans down a bit and bend forward. Vaginal sex and oral too. It might be different today now that they have to do it in pitch blackness instead of a nice summer afternoon. I'm sure the property owners of Tooting and Streatham must be pleased with themselves and what ASBOs have achieved.

@jennywhitehorses

This is the EU report, which references so much of the research. The difficulty is that the people conducting the research often have an agenda and given the stigma unfortunately involved, it is difficult to obtain data directly from sex workers. There are street outreach services who are trying, but to be honest, if you are in the position of being a prostitute, their interest can feel quite voyeuristic.

It is a very well rounded and is worth a comprehensive read.

<a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2014/493040/IPOL-FEMM_ET(2014)493040_EN.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi1rNOPjvvsAhXKTsAKHaRHAk4QFjACegQIIhAC&usg=AOvVaw0eQDWYJa-56IbGjgG-Ukmd&cshid=1605119124507" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2014/493040/IPOL-FEMM_ET(2014)493040_EN.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwi1rNOPjvvsAhXKTsAKHaRHAk4QFjACegQIIhAC&usg=AOvVaw0eQDWYJa-56IbGjgG-Ukmd&cshid=1605119124507

It is a bit of a rabbit hole, once you follow the links.

I get what you are saying about Soho and indoor workers, I do. But there have been plenty of prostitutes murdered in neighbouring Marleybone and throughout London.

The other thing to remember is that yes, there may be less women actually standing on the street, but what about all those on adult work who go and meet punters after online contact. They are equally vulnerable.

To pretend that male violence and the risk of rape isn't a reality of many prostitutes is to do them a disservice, they take extreme risks every day. It is a reality.

The German model of legalisation has increased trafficking. Trafficking, no consent in that is there?

[quote jennywhitehorses]@NiceGerbil

'As for the chance of being raped, most statistics are for drug-addicted street sex workers'

???

I don't really follow this at at.
This risk of rape is due to being in a one to to situation with a sexually entitled man.

There are other things that play into this eg being pimped etc but your comment reads that risk of rape is, negligible? Low? Etc for women who aren't drug addicted Street prostitutes?

Can you expand on that comment I'm not quite sure what you're getting at.

This risk of rape is due to being in a one to to situation with a sexually entitled man. In Soho there are always two women in the flat. There is the sex worker herself, and there is an older woman called the 'maid'. This is on the edge of legality because in Britain if two women work together for safety they can be arrested for 'brothel-keeping'.

There hasn't been a murder of a sex worker in Soho since 1947. As for rapes, I would be very surprised if there were any. The man is outnumbered and you've got a working class woman with a kitchen drawer full of potential weapons and her mate on the next floor to back her up.[/quote]
Possibly because Soho seriously declined as a red-light area? Gentrification has had a huge effect on Soho.

www.theguardian.com/society/2014/jan/19/woman-killed-prostitute-police-blame

This article, whilst old, is good on what happened in Soho

@jennywhitehorses

That is not the issue. The issues are:-

1. is it possible to eliminate sex work?
2. would it harm women to try?
3. can it be made safe?

If you apply it to other things, you’ll see that just because women are at risk due to the clandestine nature of something, doesn’t make that thing something which should be legalised/ legitimised. There needs to be safe escape routes for them. There needs to be clear legal processes and support services ready.

Consider:

1. is it possible to eliminate FGM?
2. would it harm women to try?
3. can it be made safe?

1. is it possible to eliminate forced marriage?
2. would it harm women to try?
3. can it be made safe?

1. is it possible to eliminate people trafficking?
2. would it harm women to try?
3. can it be made safe?

Are we back to Soho in 1976 or something again? I thought we'd been through all that.

What relevance is it that no prostitutes have been murdered in Soho since X? Certainly prostitutes have been murdered. I'm really not sure what that comment is meant to get across.

Bottom line is women, most of them, know only too well what men can be like.

The idea that they are treating women who are selling sex with way more respect and dignity than other women is. Well. Highly counter intuitive to say the least!

@AllTheUsernamesAreAlreadyTaken
Why does sex work have a 'clandestine nature'? It's because of 2,000 years of Christianity. There is no reason why women need to be at risk.

If you wanted to stop modern slavery, how would you do it? Let's say people forced to do hand car wash and not getting much money if any. Would you send the police in to every car wash, arrest everyone, and if you can't find a boss then prosecute the workers? Even though they are telling the police that they don't have a boss and keep the profits for themselves?

Or would you arrest anyone who turned up in a car asking for a hand wash? No. You find a way to reduce the problem as much as is possible.

If you had a plan to eliminate FGM/forced marriage/trafficking and you ended up with just as much of it, the people involved suffering even more with no end in sight, and you're standing in the way of something that really will work that's bad.

Think of drugs. In the news recently people dying because cocaine has increased in purity and they are overdosing. You will never get rid of it. People don't feel guilty about taking it because they know that the only reason people suffer in the production and distribution of cocaine is because it is illegal.

You don't try to get rid of forced marriage by getting rid of marriage. It's the forced bit that's the problem.

@chickenyhead
To pretend that male violence and the risk of rape isn't a reality of many prostitutes is to do them a disservice, they take extreme risks every day. It is a reality.
Of course they take risks every day. The legal situation in Britain doesn't allow them the option of working together for safety. Except in Soho, and the police are always trying to shut them down - sometimes succeeding.

Yes because prostitutes in non Christian countries have such a good time :/

[quote jennywhitehorses]@AllTheUsernamesAreAlreadyTaken
Why does sex work have a 'clandestine nature'? It's because of 2,000 years of Christianity. There is no reason why women need to be at risk.

If you wanted to stop modern slavery, how would you do it? Let's say people forced to do hand car wash and not getting much money if any. Would you send the police in to every car wash, arrest everyone, and if you can't find a boss then prosecute the workers? Even though they are telling the police that they don't have a boss and keep the profits for themselves?

Or would you arrest anyone who turned up in a car asking for a hand wash? No. You find a way to reduce the problem as much as is possible.

If you had a plan to eliminate FGM/forced marriage/trafficking and you ended up with just as much of it, the people involved suffering even more with no end in sight, and you're standing in the way of something that really will work that's bad.

Think of drugs. In the news recently people dying because cocaine has increased in purity and they are overdosing. You will never get rid of it. People don't feel guilty about taking it because they know that the only reason people suffer in the production and distribution of cocaine is because it is illegal.

You don't try to get rid of forced marriage by getting rid of marriage. It's the forced bit that's the problem.[/quote]
It has a clandestine nature because most people recognise that using someone else’s body in that way is harmful to them.
I’m not Christian. I not prudish. I just believe that sex should only involve two (or more) enthusiastically consenting adults. The addition of financial motivation creates coercion.

Your what-abouts are so off target. You don’t get rid of forced marriage by getting rid of marriage. That was never what I said. I’m not arguing for sex to become illegal. I said we need to create routes for the potential victims that ensure they know where to go and how to escape that situation before it even happens to them.

“You’ll never get rid of it”

You’ll never get rid of rape, murder, abuse of children, FGM, forced marriage, people trafficking, theft, the list is endless. Should we just give in and legalise those too?

I'm really interested to hear how prostition is not 'clandestine' in non Christian countries.

@chickenyhead

I have read the Sexual exploitation and prostitution and its impact on gender equality 2014 study it is a very shabby report that relies a lot on the discredited research of Melissa Farley without bothering to check it. Farley made no attempt to find a representative sample of sex workers to study. In her 9 countries report most of the German women were from a drop-in centre for drug addicts.

I am especially annoyed by this "M. Farley’s interviews with 785 people in prostitution in nine countries showed that 89% of them wanted to escape prostitution but had no other options for survival." Farley and her colleagues interviewed 854 women and 699 answered positive to 'What do you need? - leave prostitution". 699 as a proportion of 854 is not 89%, it is 82%. So she can't even add up: they should have checked that.

Also "Development of demand: In the survey of 1996, around 13.6% of men stated that they had bought sex, while in 2008, this figure had fallen to 8%". Active sex buyers increased from 1.3% to 1.8%, why aren't they telling you that? Why aren't they telling you that the 8% figure increased to 10.2% in the next survey? It's just so biased. All the data is in the Länsstyrelsen 2015 document.

I just believe that sex should only involve two (or more) enthusiastically consenting adults.

Why treat sex as completely different from any of the other pleasures in life? Two people can enjoy giving each other massages. One person can go for a professional massage. I presume you don't have a problem with that, but you have a problem with a man going to see a sex worker. Why? Because it's sex.

What would you say to a woman who said to her daughter "I'm glad you play your musical instrument with your friends but if anyone offers you money to play for them don't do it!"? And then say you'll end up with sore fingers.

If you believe that both have to be enjoying it that's fine. You're entitled to your opinion. Just as someone who thinks it should be just for married people. Not everyone believes what you do, but that's not the point. The point is that women are suffering unnecessarily, that women want to work together for safety but aren't allowed to.

I'm really interested to hear how prostition is not 'clandestine' in non Christian countries.

In Japan there are female pop groups who have sex with their audience. They don't do it for free, so it is prostitution. The singing, playing musical instruments and dancing are not what the men come for but I'm sure they appreciate that too. They are on YouTube (not the sex bit).

Technically in Japan prostitution is illegal but nobody gets punished for it.

You don’t get rid of forced marriage by getting rid of marriage. That was never what I said. I’m not arguing for sex to become illegal. I said we need to create routes for the potential victims that ensure they know where to go and how to escape that situation before it even happens to them.

“You’ll never get rid of it”

You’ll never get rid of rape, murder, abuse of children, FGM, forced marriage, people trafficking, theft, the list is endless. Should we just give in and legalise those too?

You want to get rid of forced prostitution by getting rid of prostitution. My position is not that prostitution or drugs should not be illegal because you'll never get rid of them - although that is a factor you have to take into account - it is because unnecessary deaths occur due to misguided laws.

You can't reduce deaths by decriminalizing murder. You can reduce deaths by decriminalizing prostitution and drugs. There should be no need for women to work alone and there should be no need for addicts to not know the strength of the heroin or cocaine that they have bought.

@jennywhitehorses

I just believe that sex should only involve two (or more) enthusiastically consenting adults.

Why treat sex as completely different from any of the other pleasures in life? Two people can enjoy giving each other massages. One person can go for a professional massage. I presume you don't have a problem with that, but you have a problem with a man going to see a sex worker. Why? Because it's sex.

What would you say to a woman who said to her daughter "I'm glad you play your musical instrument with your friends but if anyone offers you money to play for them don't do it!"? And then say you'll end up with sore fingers.

If you believe that both have to be enjoying it that's fine. You're entitled to your opinion. Just as someone who thinks it should be just for married people. Not everyone believes what you do, but that's not the point. The point is that women are suffering unnecessarily, that women want to work together for safety but aren't allowed to.

Such a ridiculous argument, again.

Sex IS different. It has immense potential to be harmful.

If sex wasn’t, children would be allowed to do it. Relatives would be allowed to do it.

If I was a prostitute, and heard my brother was feeling unsatisfied sexually by his wife, would I consider offering my professional services? Would I consider offering to take my 18 year old niece to work with me as an apprentice or on work experience? No! Because sex is not work.

@jennywhitehorses

You don’t get rid of forced marriage by getting rid of marriage. That was never what I said. I’m not arguing for sex to become illegal. I said we need to create routes for the potential victims that ensure they know where to go and how to escape that situation before it even happens to them.

“You’ll never get rid of it”

You’ll never get rid of rape, murder, abuse of children, FGM, forced marriage, people trafficking, theft, the list is endless. Should we just give in and legalise those too?

You want to get rid of forced prostitution by getting rid of prostitution. My position is not that prostitution or drugs should not be illegal because you'll never get rid of them - although that is a factor you have to take into account - it is because unnecessary deaths occur due to misguided laws.

You can't reduce deaths by decriminalizing murder. You can reduce deaths by decriminalizing prostitution and drugs. There should be no need for women to work alone and there should be no need for addicts to not know the strength of the heroin or cocaine that they have bought.

You can reduce deaths by decriminalizing prostitution and drugs

Because it’s worked so well in Amsterdam. No trafficking. No murders. No rapes.

You can't reduce deaths by decriminalizing murder. You can reduce deaths by decriminalizing prostitution and drugs.

One of the big arguments for legalising abortion was that the illegality was causing unnecessary suffering and death. Plenty of people thought abortion was immoral and disturbing and something they wouldn't do themselves, but were persuaded that harm could be reduced by making it legal and safe (and perhaps reducing its incidence through sex education and contraception).

@jennywhitehorses

The EU report relies upon a huge array of studies and fully explains that many studies have been conducted with an underlying agenda. I haven't found that it heavily relies upon Farley.

You have invariably talked mainly about Soho prostitutes. I have yet to work out your agenda. Maybe you could reveal it?

Not sure the abortion analogy works. You have safe medical procedures, or unsafe medical procedures.

The thing that makes prostitution unsafe is the punters - they are the people doing the raping and murdering. The legality or otherwise of being a punter doesn't fundamentally change the nature of the men doing it - they are fucking scum, and a certain percentage of them are rapists and psycopaths who like raping and killing women. Making it legal doesn't magically turn that percentage of men into nice people. As an activity you cannot make it safe.

Remind me - how many weeks into the Leeds "managed zone" experiment was it that Daria Pionka was murdered?

Comparing prostition to abortion is pretty shitty.

Just saying.