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'm interested in hearing his points about conscription, I do think the army is an interesting comparison as I suppose in a way it is being paid for the usage of your body (even if it's a different context)

People in the forces are paid regularly, often housed, unlikely at most times to be in a war zone, if they were to die in a war every effort is made to bring bodies home and they are remembered in some way wether inscriptions on memorials or a day of remembrance every year. Their PPE is provided as part of the job (yes ok often the PPE is shit and inadequate but better than a prostitutes)
Even conscripted forces personnel have all the above.

This is from a previous post and I'm paraphrasing but, prostitution can never be a job, health and safety would never allow it. The type of PPE needed would make sex an impossibility.

Its exploitation but not any different than a retail worker for example

You and your 'DP' must live in a pretty rough part of town if Tesco checkout assistants risk serious sexual assault as part and parcel of their working life.

Your DP doesn't understand what conscription is.

There are a wide variety of physical jobs that women have traditionally been excluded from due to sexist beliefs about their capabilities. This is changing over time.

It has nothing to do with some men believing you can buy consent for sexual activity.

Genuinely, he's supportive, kind, not entrenched in stereotypes, pulls his weight at home etc.

This is just one of these issues where we just cant agree. I'm honestly surprised it's his view. His main points seem to be:

1. people do jobs they dont want all the time
2. we ask people to use their bodies in ways that can cause harm (e.g. all the people that got cancer from removing asbestos for example) in lots of roles
3. you'd be buying a service from someone in the same way you could buy a massage and they could turn people down in the same way a masseur could
4. improvements to safety and regulation would be put in place to protect women
5. how is it different to asking soldiers to go to war and fight?

I am getting quite concerned about your safety OP.

Again, for me, while it may be a really free choice for 5% of women, I worry about what impact that decision has on those not willingly considering it as an option. Do we get to a world where women are considered lazy or not to be trying every possible avenue for low income if they refuse to do some sort of sex work?

That's an interesting thought, and definitely a worrying one. I guess I see it that sex work should have all of the safeguarding and protection of a regular job, but should not be enforced in a Jobseeker situation (as I can acknowledge that if it is enforced, then that would constitute paid rape in my eyes). I can acknowledge it's a tricky balance though, and it does bring into question certain elements of consent.

For example the idea of "maintenance shags" e.g. where you're in a long term relationship and you have sex with your partner every once in a while even if you're not horny / attracted to the partner in that moment in time, because it's better for your relationship so you still "get something" out of it. I'm not likening it to prostitution at all, as I can acknowledge they're very different situations, but it does mean evaluating what "true" consent consists of (e.g. do you have to be horny, do you have to be attracted to your partner, does it have to be unpaid etc). Because I imagine to some extent, quite a few people have sex for reasons other than horniness / attraction and I wonder why the paid element changes peoples' views - other than in situations where money is the coercive element.

Sorry just spitballing and I know my points are not necessarily cogent all the way through, but I think the ethics of prostitution to bring into play what real / justified consent is. If it's not too personal, your DH mentions he'd be fine with doing sex work and he'd be find with some of his family doing sex work, but would he be fine with soliciting a sex worker?

His view is that the current set up is that there needs to be huge improvements which would come with legalisation e.g. widespread use of video cameras to identify offenders who are violent, Health and Safety practices and guidance for the "workplace" etc*

How does your 'DP' believe that H&S legislation requiring protection from body fluids could be implemented in 'sex work'?

Also, how is he proposing that these 'video cameras' operate? Should they be in each 'sex workers' room, so that she and her 'clients' are on camera having sex? Nobody would agree to that.

Thanks for your concern @MillieEpple but I'm perfectly fine and safe.

This is a purely academic/theoretical debate, he's not looking to push me into anything - I made a comment last night about how sex "work" should always use the speech marks because it is definitely not work to which he asked why I thought that and here we are.

He does work for whoever asked although I'm not sure how relevant that is?

His main points seem to be:
1) people do jobs they dont want all the time

So he doesn't believe that a woman needs to be consenting to have sex then?

And this man is your partner???

Is conscription even a thing in the UK? It's all just a thought exercise for this guy.

I think he's demonstrating a severe lack of empathy and has a limited imagination.

So would he rather give his best friend's dad a blow job or lift a bag of cement?

2) we ask people to use their bodies in ways that can cause harm (e.g. all the people that got cancer from removing asbestos for example) in lots of roles

No disrespect, but your "DP" isn't the brightest bulb.

Every precaution to reduce harm would have been taken for those working to remove asbestos. Not to mention that in so doing, they were potentially saving people's lives, so you might say the risk was a proportionate one.

If prostituation were completely banned, what would happen? Some men (and yes, 'clients' are almost always men, even when the 'sex workers' are male) wouldn't be able to get their end away whenever they liked. Hardly a life or death matter, is it?

5) how is it different to asking soldiers to go to war and fight

We havn't had conscription since the end of wartime National Service in the 50s. People were not asked. They were shot or imprisoned if they refused. What an idiot. If he compares the two then he's comparing prostituted women to a wartime emergency measure and thinks men wanting a blow job is a national emergency to be provided for at risk of imprisonment. He's showing his true self.

we ask people to use their bodies in ways that can cause harm (e.g. all the people that got cancer from removing asbestos for example) in lots of roles
And once we knew that asbestos caused cancer we stopped using it.
We now have a HSE to keep people safe in their jobs. Even near misses are supposed to be reported on. So roofers have to use machinery to get on a roof because ladders are inherently unsafe, where that's not possible ladders can be used but with an anchor person at the bottom.
Stable platforms have to be used indoors for ceiling work, gas safe registered engineers have to be used for gas work, to prevent numpties blowing up half a street. Etc etc.

I would have a close look at the bank statements if I were you. He's clearly a fan.

@KnightsofColumbusThatHurt

You're building a straw man here. Sex workers can and do discriminate. It's super common for sex workers to explicitly exclude black men, for example.

Yes, that's why sex work is different to other work. If a shop refused to serve a customer purely on the basis that the customer was black, then that would be discrimination and the customer would probably have a good case to take the shop to court.

If 'sex work is work' and is just like any other job, then it's surely subject to the same discrimination laws etc. If its 'just like lugging around bags of cement' then would it be OK to refuse to provide that service to someone if they are black?

Good point made as well about believing that sex work is work not being compatible with enthusiastic consent. Even people who love their jobs have days when they aren't feeling enthusiastic about it, would rather be elsewhere and don't really want to do it.....

My point wasn't about whether it's ok or not, it's to counter the narrative that these women have to have sex with someone who pays. That they are unable to exercise any choice of their clientele. It's illegal as it is, so isn't subject to employment laws. In those circumstances a significant portion of these women are perfectly content to pre-emptively refuse business with whole racial demographics. That doesn't exactly scream desperation.

yes thats my take as well Stellwagen

its all a bit 'musings of a beardy woke bro' on something that in reality has no affect on him at all

Fundamentally he believes that consent can be bought.
(And that a man's need to come is on the same footing as preventing a country being invaded by Nazis)
He is a profoundly sexist individual.

@sicklytoaster I agree with a lot of what you say. I'm not sure if It's illegal as it is was in relation to the act of paying for sex, but paying for sex is legal in England, Wales and Scotland I think (not sure about NI).

I don't think your DP is considering the reality of what a sex worker is thinking.
Of all the sex workers I have met I don't believe any of them would do it if there was another option that offered flexible working hours and fast money.
Many have mental health problems, are single parents, have health issues etc.

Assume someone has said.

Forget his relatives.

Would he feel that getting fucked by men much bigger and stronger than him would be the same as working on an office or retail or whatever?

If so. I'd be tempted to say. Go on then we could do with some more cash. And offer to put an ad out for him.

OP, I agree that the amount of people who do it by choice is low. However, I think it's a number that is hugely increasing particularly amongst young people,

When you say 'people' you actually menan 'women', don't you?

with a large number of celebrities (and my personal friends) taking part in sex work like Onlyfans or otherwise soliciting sexual contact for money online.

So "a large number of celebrities" - who presumably have good options when it comes to earning a living - are shagging strange men for cash?

Really?

He'd be aok with his possibly elderly mother getting paid for sex?

Do you have kids.

Honestly I'd ditch him. I means fucks sake. That's awful.

Tell him you need more cash and to get his arse out there. He wouldn't. Like fuck would he.

And why is it ok for his mum to do it but not you. It's just like working in an office after all.

He sounds horrible. Honestly I mean WTF.

*So "a large number of celebrities" - who presumably have good options when it comes to earning a living - are shagging strange men for cash?

Really?*

No, which is why I asked if prostitution in this thread was the only form of sex work (which I don't believe it is). Bella Thorne made $1 mill in 24hours on Onlyfans, and a large amount of celebrities offer porn or sexual content for money. Not the same as prostitution I agree, but is still part of "the sex work debate".

When you say 'people' you actually menan 'women', don't you?
Young men are also doing sex work, though I agree it's predominantly women.