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

I still believe that men who purchase use of women's bodies, when they know that those women do not want it, are amoral. I do not consider that true active consent and I do not believe that undertaking such work is possible without significant damage. Whilst you refuse to answer to clarify your point, I agree that prostitutes should be able to work in tents. The problem will remain that in countries where it has been legalised in theory, the police still penalise. Legalisation is not going to fix that.

I don't see the service that a sex worker provides as being morally different from the service that someone else provides. I can understand that an Evangelical Christian pastor, a Roman Catholic nun or a Moslem imam would disagree with me. I can also see that some people who are more secular are disgusted and horrified about what sex workers and their clients do and so are prone to believe false statistics which originate with Evangelical Christians like Jim Wells or Catholic nuns like the ones in Ruhama. Or they will have vague ideas about harm and damage and not want to think about that too much or bother to research it or check the statistics they see.

127 prostitutes murdered in the Netherlands since legalization (Jim Wells). 38% of Irish prostitutes have attempted suicide (Ruhama). All you have to do is Google it and follow the links and you can see that it is false. The sex worker Laura Lee wrote a letter to the Belfast Telegraph refuting Jim Wells' false statistic. That's online. Why do sex workers have to do that? Why can't people who claim to work in the interests of prostitutes like Kat Banyard work it out instead of repeating the false statistic of a religious bigot in her book?

Or they talk vaguely about power imbalance. A rich man can pay an Eastern European as a sex worker or a nanny. Same power imbalance. A poor man can go to see a sex worker from his own community who will have more money saved than he has. No power imbalance. She will tell him what she will and will not do: no sex without condom, no anal, no kissing. And money in cash up front.

We buy consent from people all the time. We know they 'do not want it'. You say sex is different because it can cause harm or damage. Let's think about that. Do you think that all women in all forms of prostitution are damaged? Do you think that Dr Brooke Magnanti was damaged by her involvement in prostitution? If you asked her she would say no. There are two ways you can react to that. You can say that she HAS been damaged, and that part of the damage is that she can no longer think straight, so she doesn't recognize the damage.

Dr Brooke Magnanti is a successful author with published books including The Sex Myth. She has used her training in statistics to demolish ideas such as the idea that when 3 lap dancing clubs opened in Camden the number of rapes increased in that borough. She makes Lilith R&D, part of the Eaves charity, who said that look right idiots. So we have to ask what makes Lilith R&D not be able to think straight.

We know what makes people not be able to think straight. It is involvement in religion and ideology. It is mainly the Evangelical Christians and the Radical Feminists. Not ordinary feminists: lots of feminists agree with me. I am a feminist. Brooke Magnanti is a feminist.

Or they might say that Brooke Magnanti was an escort and most prostitutes aren't escorts. So she's not representative of sex workers in general. Do you think that means they will say let's leave escorts out of the equation? Let's leave them alone and concentrate on other forms of sex work which are more problematic? No. As soon as you start thinking like that the whole ideology starts to unravel.

We could also talk about PTSD. And the difference between decriminalisation and legalisation. I don't want this comment to get too long.

Ha ha... Like you think none of us could possibly have PhDs.

"Mummies! They're all a bit thick you know."

Well they may all have PhDs, but that doesn't devalue the lived experience of people on this thread. Having experienced these things up close and personal changes a person and their perspective.
But all of that experience can easily be swept under a carpet by the Jenny's and their educated professional sex workers and those voyeuristic enough to study the subject without intention to change the options available to workers.

Deluded.

@NiceGerbil

So you bring Suzy lamplugh into this thread, simply in order to guess that that lone women aren't allowed to show men round properties since (that sounds unlikely tbh but if you've got info on that I'm happy to say I'm wrong), in order to make a point. That is not even the point of the thread.

The point of the thread is what is best for sex workers. Women should not be forced to work alone. We don't expect other women to work alone, so why should sex workers? I am quoting below from Revolting Prostitutes: the fight for sex workers' rights by Juno Mac and Molly Smith. Chapter 4 page 103 in the paperback version.

"For many sex workers, working together in pairs or small groups is infinitely preferable to being alone with a stranger who has the power to maim or kill them. Indeed, although anti-prostitution campaigners sometimes portray sex workers' wish to work in pairs legally as illustrating the intrinsic danger and aberrance of prostitution, other occupations widely acknowledge that working alone can be dangerous. Afther the presumed murder of estate agent Suzy Lamplugh in 1986, estate agents were advised to work in pairs where possible or have a 'buddy' to keep track of their whereabouts. The Royal College of Nursing produces similar advice for health care workers, as does the British Association of Social Workers. Unison, one of Britain's largest trade unions, highlights that working alone renders many workers vulnerable to violence and suggests working in pairs."

They give 4 references for all this - one of them for the Suzy Lamplugh Trust - and there is also a note about victim blaming.

Someone told me that you don't get to look at a flat or house unless you have a mortgage set up. I find that difficult to believe but I would expect that you would have to go into the office with your passport and they would photocopy it. You would fill in a form with personal details and that would be checked against the passport. They might have access to an online database where identities are checked - is this a real person. No more Mr Kippers.

Then even if a solitary female showed a man around he could never get away with it. Good for them. Maybe we can show the same consideration and respect for sex workers.

What was that about playing chess with a pigeon?

Ha ha... Like you think none of us could possibly have PhDs.

I don't believe that NiceGerbil has gone to university. Can you imagine it. The lecturer would say war is merely an extension of diplomacy by other means. NiceGerbil would say no it isn't, that's a shit analogy. War kills millions of people and diplomacy doesn't.

The lecturer might try to explain how analogy works and he would reply by saying somebody seems to be upset at him saying it's a shit analogy.

????

Oh I remember now

I don't see the service that a sex worker provides as being morally different from the service that someone else provides

It's been explained at considerable length what the difference is.

I can understand that an Evangelical Christian pastor, a Roman Catholic nun or a Moslem imam would disagree with me

You have a very limited imagination then if that's all you can imagine.

Brooke Magnanti was a prostitute- I don't know why you are pussy footing around what you call her.

Laura Lee used to post occasionally on here. She died at a relatively young age. Her obituaries didn't specify the cause of death but I'll hazard a guess that being a prostitute wasn't conducive to good health.

A rich man can pay an Eastern European as a sex worker or a nanny. Same power imbalance

You are utterly deluded. I expect by average standards my husband is a "rich man". He and I have employed nannies. They weren't East European , not that that makes any difference. The suggestion that his relationship with our nannies was no difference to that between a punter and a prostitute is deeply offensive as well as utterly delusional.

I've just realized that I referred to NiceGerbil as 'he'. I've got my pronouns mixed up which I understand is a big issue in this day and age. That's because I always visualize NiceGerbil as a Baldrick type figure.

Also I said lecturer when it would have been better to say tutor.

I only reply to her because I know there are others who will be thinking what she has said. So it's important to answer her statements. Also I don't back down when I'm challenged.

I'm sorry that I come across as a bit patronizing but when I have been accused of being either a pimp or a punter or a sex worker who can't think straight (something about recognizing boundaries) I can be forgiven for replying in kind sometimes. If you want to guess at my 'secret identity' have you thought I might be an academic?

They do sometimes read social media and I'm sure they comment sometimes. Anonymously. I read comments in a newspaper article and a Swedish woman called Pye had commented. I think this must have been Pye Jakobsson the Swedish activist. She explained at length although sometimes ungrammatically what it is like for sex workers in Sweden now. I've still got that somewhere it's very revealing. I could repost it here if I thought anyone was interested.

I'm not a pimp, punter or academic. Maybe I'm just more widely read and have more experience of what I'm talking about.

If, and I do mean if, you are trying to get a rise out of me you'll have to try a little harder!

Calling me he, saying I look and behave like Baldrick, and that I definitely haven't got a degree isn't going to cut the mustard.

I hope no one reports because while personal attacks are not allowed i think people should be able to read all your posts in full.

So, to return to a (really spectacularly shit) analogy way up thread... if war is the continuation of diplomacy by other means, apparently prostitution is the continuation of recorder-playing by other means...

I really don't think Gerbil is the one struggling with the concept of analogy here . And I think Soola wins the thread

(Sorry about the personal attacks, gerbil, but unpleasant as it is, it's nonetheless interesting to watch the mask slipping further and further in real time.)

@DidoLamenting

The suggestion that his relationship with our nannies was no difference to that between a punter and a prostitute is deeply offensive as well as utterly delusional.

Have you read The Reluctant Billionaire: The Tragic Life of Gerald Grosvenor, Sixth Duke of Westminster by Tom Quinn? He got high-class escorts to come to his London flat. A journalist found out about it and interviewed some of the women.

They were all Eastern European and told the journalist that they could have stayed in Eastern Europe and remained poor. They could have worked as cleaners or in a coffee shop in England but chose to work as escorts so they could 'live like a princess'.

He paid them thousands of pound per hour. He asked for unprotected sex but didn't get it, which surprised me because you would think one of them would have done it for a bit extra cash. One of them hinted at anal sex, she said that he wanted to do something he did at boarding school. He didn't get that either. I'm not quite sure why not, maybe the agency were strict on standards.

In Chester a couple of years ago there was a memorial ceremony for him attended by royalty. I seem to remember princess Kate was photoed getting out of her car. So you can't say he was thought of as a social pariah. You should read about the sort of people Winston Churchill associated with.

Churchill liked to visit the south of France but his wife Clementine didn't want to go with him. She didn't like his friends, they were too 'louche'. Especially Daisy 'Wanton' Fellowes and Doris Castlerosse. Still, they weren't as bad as Enid Lindeman. She slept with all the officers in her husband's regiment. She didn't have boundaries.

Comparisons between recorder playing and fucking

1. Most people play the recorder and do fucking for their own pleasure
2. Some people do it for money
3. Those who play the recorder and fuck for money may or may not enjoy it
4. Music and sex are two of the three great pleasures in life
5. Some people are willing to pay for their pleasures
6. They will pay more for someone with experience and talent
7. Musicians and sex workers sometimes take drugs
8. Some of them will get addicted (David Bowie, Elton John etc)

Differences between playing the recorder and fucking

1. Your mother will never tell you that you must never accept payment for playing the recorder (even though it could end in cocaine addiction)

And with that most recent post, I just have to re-post Soola's image.

We really have reached (in fact, long since passed) the "you can't argue with stupid" stage.

@DidoLamenting
I'm glad your husband treated your nannies well. After all, we wouldn't want modern day slavery would we? Domestic slavery is not very nice, but many rich people practice it. If you want to find foreign women chained to radiators you would do better looking in a mansion than in a brothel.

I'm sure that a nanny would be offended by being compared to a prostitute. That's because most people think prostitutes are immoral. I've met lots of sex workers and most of them do it to provide for their families. I admire them.

You should read how nannies treated their charges. The Queen's father - George VI - was abused by his nanny Mary Peters. As was his brother Edward. Still, they didn't become drug addicts like their brother Prince George Duke of Kent. Abuse was common by nannies. So I don't have a lot of respect for the profession, much more for the sex workers. They would have known all about them, the aristocracy with their courtesans.

That's because most people think prostitutes are immoral

No, it's the punters, pimps, traffickers and apologists who are immoral.

@jennywhitehorses

I still believe that men who purchase use of women's bodies, when they know that those women do not want it, are amoral. I do not consider that true active consent and I do not believe that undertaking such work is possible without significant damage. Whilst you refuse to answer to clarify your point, I agree that prostitutes should be able to work in tents. The problem will remain that in countries where it has been legalised in theory, the police still penalise. Legalisation is not going to fix that.

I don't see the service that a sex worker provides as being morally different from the service that someone else provides. I can understand that an Evangelical Christian pastor, a Roman Catholic nun or a Moslem imam would disagree with me. I can also see that some people who are more secular are disgusted and horrified about what sex workers and their clients do and so are prone to believe false statistics which originate with Evangelical Christians like Jim Wells or Catholic nuns like the ones in Ruhama. Or they will have vague ideas about harm and damage and not want to think about that too much or bother to research it or check the statistics they see.

127 prostitutes murdered in the Netherlands since legalization (Jim Wells). 38% of Irish prostitutes have attempted suicide (Ruhama). All you have to do is Google it and follow the links and you can see that it is false. The sex worker Laura Lee wrote a letter to the Belfast Telegraph refuting Jim Wells' false statistic. That's online. Why do sex workers have to do that? Why can't people who claim to work in the interests of prostitutes like Kat Banyard work it out instead of repeating the false statistic of a religious bigot in her book?

Or they talk vaguely about power imbalance. A rich man can pay an Eastern European as a sex worker or a nanny. Same power imbalance. A poor man can go to see a sex worker from his own community who will have more money saved than he has. No power imbalance. She will tell him what she will and will not do: no sex without condom, no anal, no kissing. And money in cash up front.

We buy consent from people all the time. We know they 'do not want it'. You say sex is different because it can cause harm or damage. Let's think about that. Do you think that all women in all forms of prostitution are damaged? Do you think that Dr Brooke Magnanti was damaged by her involvement in prostitution? If you asked her she would say no. There are two ways you can react to that. You can say that she HAS been damaged, and that part of the damage is that she can no longer think straight, so she doesn't recognize the damage.

Dr Brooke Magnanti is a successful author with published books including The Sex Myth. She has used her training in statistics to demolish ideas such as the idea that when 3 lap dancing clubs opened in Camden the number of rapes increased in that borough. She makes Lilith R&D, part of the Eaves charity, who said that look right idiots. So we have to ask what makes Lilith R&D not be able to think straight.

We know what makes people not be able to think straight. It is involvement in religion and ideology. It is mainly the Evangelical Christians and the Radical Feminists. Not ordinary feminists: lots of feminists agree with me. I am a feminist. Brooke Magnanti is a feminist.

Or they might say that Brooke Magnanti was an escort and most prostitutes aren't escorts. So she's not representative of sex workers in general. Do you think that means they will say let's leave escorts out of the equation? Let's leave them alone and concentrate on other forms of sex work which are more problematic? No. As soon as you start thinking like that the whole ideology starts to unravel.

We could also talk about PTSD. And the difference between decriminalisation and legalisation. I don't want this comment to get too long.

I don't see the service that a sex worker provides as being morally different from the service that someone else provides.

Well, actually, you do. You’ve admitted you wouldn’t offer your sex services to family members as you would in other professional services and you wouldn’t consider offering your 16 year old niece a work placement which you would in other services.

We aren’t thick. Although, admittedly I only have a MA. Our argument isn’t the one that flips back on itself. We have one, solid stance. Sexual consent cannot be bought.

You can recommend all the studies and books and research papers you want. Most prostitutes are at risk of STDs, rape, murder and all variations on those themes.
It wont matter to the holbeck prostitutes who are on the street in all weathers that prostitutes in a fucking flat in Soho are safe and dont have to do anal or accept no condoms. They are still not safe where they are. Unless you suggest they move en mass to Soho. Cos they sure can do just that. Soon as they've paid off the trafficker and pimp yeah?

Interesting thread, I've enjoyed reading it and trying to learn more.

Jennywhitehorses arguments have certainly made me rethink where I stand on prostitution.

Actually @jennywhitehorses, the point of this thread was not for you to personally attack other posters.

And sorry, but in what world is Wikipedia an academic reference?

Given that it is well documented that sex workers often do not declare their occupation (Samuel 1987, Smith 2018), how can you distinguish between the death of a sex worker and the death of a non-sex worker in the stats?

What other type of employment leads to greater financial reward for the least experience (and often age)?

What other service allows the "customer" to discriminate on the basis of the providers body shape, hair colour or sex?

What other occupation can be delivered when the "server" is unconscious? Drugged rapes of sex workers are increasing according to the British Crime Survey in 2017 and 2018.

What other employment contradicts basic health and safety conditions as enforced by the HSE? Laws aboutoccupational exposure(“reasonably anticipated skin, eye, mucous membrane, or parenteral contact with blood or other potentially infectious materials”) mandate latex gloves, eye goggles, face masks, and aprons to protect employees.In your desire to protect women (and not simply to cater to men ofc), I assume you are suggesting that all prostitutes should wear the above?

What other employment could lead to unwanted pregnancies?

It's great that you've read so widely and have clearly taken such an interest in Soho. I actually agree with a few of your points around small things we can do under the current system to improve safety for these women. But that does seem to be tinkering around the edges and missing the big point that the actual work is damaging, physically and psychologically. We've heard from ex sex workers on this thread and there are a plethora of books, lectures and talks from former sex workers who actively campaign against the practice which your insistence on highlighting sex work advocates appears to miss.

Your refusal to engage with the other side of the debate makes it very apparent you do not have a PhD but to assume no-one else on this thread does is a mistake.

Hello OP.

Getting back to the topic. Has this topic come up with your OH again? How are you feeling about his stance now- what do you think your next move is?

Agree to disagree/ agree not to talk about this topic/ tell him to stop being such a nob...?

Thanks OP x