To those who consider prostitution rape...

[Ahsoka2001]

I recently found some old MN threads where posters debated whether a man who has sex with a prostitute commits rape. Those in favour argued that the woman's consent is not freely given - it is conditional on the basis money is exchanged and consent cannot be bought -

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/3012135-Is-prostitution-rape

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/2791778-does-having-sex-with-a-prostitute-constitute-rape

To those who agree with this position, I'm wondering where exactly do we draw the line? If all prostitution is rape, then -

a) What about female pornstars? They only have sex on camera on the condition that they are paid for the shoot. Does this mean every male pornstar in history is a rapist because the woman's consent was bought and not freely given?

b) What about mainstream/narrative cinema actresses? If a female Hollywood star only consents to a sex scene on the condition of receiving a paycheck for the role, does that mean they're being sexually assaulted when they perform a scene in which they're kissed/touched sexually? Does this mean male Hollywood actors who partake in these scenes are sexual assaulters?

...Surely not! But again, if all prostitution automatically equals rape, then how and where do we draw the line?

Yes.
Although it's not really about the woman's rights is it?
Its about the rights of some men to indulge their kinks for getting aroused by degradation and harm caused to women.

Melanie Phillips (yes I know, she's often batshit crazy) made the point on a Radio 4 Moral Maze debate at the time of the ending of the Formula One girls and general sexual objectification of women.

One of the witnesses was a stripper who was very much against the ban. Stripping empowered her. Melanie Phillips' take was that it isn't empowering. It's completely the opposite. The woman is being paid to degrade and humiliate herself. The only element of "empowerment" is giving a bloke an erection.

Its cos its women innit?
The second class citizens.
No one cares what happens to women.

Especially the male performers but then the job is less risky for them.

I would think that sex work ending up being rape for most women, the same would apply to the few male prostitutes and the male porn performers too- that is ends up being forced sex or rape for them too.

If you take your principle and apply it to the rest of life you will have an entirely untenable situation.

For example - you would end up removing a lot of adult's rights to consent in many situations, because it's not totally "freely" given - whatever that means I daresay truly free decisions are the exception not the rule.

Are you seriously writing an anti-choice screed on a feminist chat?

That is actually a great point. For example, in what other job would it be considered normal for customers to just ignore that you were clearly off your head on drugs to take advantage of your situation? Prostitutes use drugs a lot. The johns don't care if they're too impaired to consent.

Well, that's part of why the world is so fucked up, isn't it. Too many people don't care if they're taking advantage of others.

It's not about taking away the right to consent, but taking away the privilege of exploiting others who aren't in a position to give free, informed consent.

@TempestTost (and @Defenestre who also made the same point) what other situations are you thinking of?
The only situations I can think of where proceeding without consent is a crime are healthcare (where consent must be informed) and sexual assault.
Or are you talking about ethics rather than legalities?

Looks like it, though I am not 'anti-choice', in that, though I don't like e.g. abortion, I am not stopping anyone else having an abortion if that is their life choice, nor saying women should die because it is wrong to abort a dead baby, end an ectopic pregancy, refused life-saving treatment to the mother, etc. (stupid idea!), nor supporting or lauding those who campaign against abortion. But choice is an illusion. We do not have bodily autonomy in the way that is being put forward here.
The idea being put forward that abortion up to term is a right women should have is not in line with current thinking among UK women afaik - as the move is more to reduce the gestation time to 22 weeks in elective abortions (i.e. those not carried out for a medical reason). Obv there are circumstances where a pregnancy has to be ended because of illness, death of child in utero, etc, or because needed treatment for the mother will be delayed otherwise. I would not count these as abortion - they are the early birth of a viable child in the case of illness of the mother, with the chance the child will also survive. Removal of a dead child from the mother's body is no more abortion than is the removal of an ectopic pregnancy, or an appendectomy. We already, de facto, have abortion up to term for conditions where it is vital the pregnancy be ended, in all those cases. No sensible person opposes ending a pregnancy in such circumstances.
But bodily autonomy is an illusion and pretending it isn't can cause endless harm e.g. playing into the idea that prostituting women is their choice.
Since you brought up abortion I will point out that allowing elective abortion to birth puts women in danger of being coerced e.g. because the child is female - elective abortions among some communities are just for this reason, which I would think anyone supporting women's rights on a feminist chat board would oppose. There is little bodily autonomy for a woman in those circumstances, esp bearing in mind her culture tells her that girl babies are unwelcome and she should do her best not to produce a daughter (with all the repercussions of imbalanced sex ratios as currently the case in India and China, which situation has not improved the position of women but worsened it). Bear in mind it is women who support FGM in societies that practice it because their culture indoctrinates them into believing female genitalia are unclean, with the added nastiness that it prevents rape, which leaves a picture of a society so misogynistic it has no value, at least in my eyes. (Maybe cut off little boys' penises? This would also prevent at least some sorts of rape - don't see any society going for that one!)
As to prostitution, many women are trafficked, others have no other means of support. They are not making an informed choice and selling the holes in your body for someone to use is not a job like any other. Ditto pornography. Regulation on the Nordic model would lessen the risk for women who are being prostituted, and brakes on the material the porn industry can put out (censorship, those in that 'industry' have protested) is a viable and necessary act in a civilised society where women are respected. That would be a move towards bodily autonomy, I think.

This.
I lived in a red light district for a number of years. I saw drug addicted, emaciated women in situations with men that were horrible to witness. The imbalance of power, both financial and physical was totally obvious, as was the sexual violence. I have also seen women running away from men who became even more violent, one who had a machete, for instance. If you have ever lived in a place where you see scenes like this, you are certainly in no doubt about “consent” and how that plays out in life.

@SirVixofVixHall ,

I do see prostitution as analogical to drugs or alcohol. In addition, you have to define prostitution carefully. Is selling online ‘sex’ prostitution or something completely different?

When you look at the way the market is structured (even for alcohol at the bottom end), the criminal involvement and the abuse, they are very similar.

But that does not mean that all drug transactions are criminal (in jurisdictions where they are legal) or that all users are abusive.

The crux of the matter is whether sold sex is per se harmful to the seller and, if so, to what extent. It is true you cannot consent to serious assault, which rules out organ selling. There was a famous case about this and sadomasochistic sex. But we draw the line quite far in other areas, so consensual ‘mild’ S&M is still legal. And where does a 20 year old marrying an 80 year old multimillionaire stand here? It would be hard to argue there wasn’t at least something transactional about the relationship. Law always trades off autonomy vs protection (of the self and broader society).

So I don’t think any civilised person could defend the type of prostitution you have seen, but should that mean all prostitution is rape, or should it be carefully regulated?

You brought it up. In the post chrome was replying to.
Bodily autonomy is not "an illusion". It's a right that some people don't currently have.

Womens bodies are not like drugs or alcohol.
Selling online sex is virtual prostitution in my eyes - not as physically harmful to the woman but mentally still damaging. And the punters (who should be the focus here) are still demonstrating their entitlement to sex and lack of regard to the woman involved and her feelings.

We also haven't even touched on the issue of the harms to relationships and families of men paying for sex. It is the cause of relationship break ups and trauma for partners and children who have done nothing.

I want the Nordic model. I want punters to be made aware in no uncertain terms that their feelings of entitlement to sex and the resulting harms to women are not socially acceptable.

But we draw the line quite far in other areas, so consensual ‘mild’ S&M is still legal.
That's also not true. One can't consent to being assaulted. The reality is consensual S&M is illegal but never gets reported as a crime.

@CassieMaddox ,

I don’t think that is right. I think you can consent to minor but not major injury, as I stated.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2021/feb/17/landmarks-in-law-when-five-men-were-jailed-for-consensual-sex

@CassieMaddox ,

I don’t think you can say we should focus on the ‘punters’.

The Nordic model is very appealing to some feminists, those who like the hierarchy of victimhood. It is less appealing to those who take a stronger line on autonomy.

On a more practical basis, there is a lot of debate on whether it has actually made ‘working girls’ safer or the reverse.

I don't think any civilised person can defend prostitution.

Have you read any of the comments about autonomy?

I'm in favour of the Nordic Model. My husband is in favour of the Nordic Model.

It's got nothing to do with the "hierarchy of victimhood" (whatever that soundbite means)

It's a subject we've discussed along with surrogacy. In some ways my husband is a simple soul. I assume from your name you're a man ? My husband just can't get his head round, in the case of prostitution, how he, or any other man can delude themselves that a woman wants to have sex, but only if you pay her.

(In the case of surrogacy, the notion that it might be acceptable just baffles him)

What I would like to see is at least adequate social support, mental and physical health care, addiction support ,proper wages etc. Only then we can debate choice .

What I would like to see is putting responsibility on the punters so they are legally responsible if they rape women and children who have been trafficked or coerced or under the influence. Mandatory reporting too if they suspect, so they can't fucking post reviews of "do not recommend" when they suspect things aren't quite right ,but go ahead anyways and then complain about the faulty "product". No excuses.

What I would like to see is more work in identifying trafficked and abused women and children, rescuing them regardless of where they're from (Scotland anyone?) and putting serious work in to rehabilitate them and reintegrate them into society.

Then yeah, we can talk about choice and Suzie who loves shagging sooo much she made it into a profession where she's earning millions and living her best life.

The Nordic model criminalises the purchase of sex while completely decriminalising its sale, for the benefit of people who think its something else.

I have no idea how anyone thinks thats bad for autonomy and I'm not looking forwards to reading the word salad.

On a more practical basis, there is a lot of debate on whether it has actually made ‘working girls’ safer or the reverse.

then let's just make prostitution illegal. End it all. It serves only men, and I'd be quite happy to never see another woman in prostitution.

On a more practical basis, there is a lot of debate on whether it has actually made ‘working girls’ safer or the reverse.

There is absolutely no debate about whether or not prostitution has made life better or worse for women and girls. Everywhere it has been legalised it has led to an increase in sex trafficking, and the sex trafficking of underage children.
Living in or passing through a red light district is awful.
WHO report that globally, female sex workers are estimated to be 30 times more likely to be living with HIV than other women of reproductive age.