Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

How is it possible to be a feminist and support the sex industry?

462 replies

Molesworth · 05/04/2010 15:33

I've just been reading this article from the guardian. Young girls are being sold to brothel keepers and made to take steroids so that they look older than they really are.

All my instincts say that the sex industry is just plain wrong. I know some feminists think it's OK (although obviously they wouldn't support practices like those described in the article). Are there any sex industry supporting feminists here? What's the rationale?

OP posts:
claig · 07/04/2010 23:58

dittany , do you want to make prostitution illegal?

dittany · 07/04/2010 23:59

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SolidGoldBrass · 08/04/2010 00:03

Dittany: thanks for the link, will explore that further.

Mind you, OK, let's talk about the buyers. Some of them certainly are woman-hating arseholes, I don't think anyone would deny that. Of the others, it would seem (this is what I have heard from the willing sex workers I am aquainted with) that they want a variety of things - guaranteed sex rather than time spent 'on the pull' with no guarantees, the acting out of a specific fantasy etc. And for those buyers who are not into hurting others, not physically or verbally abusive, I (and some other people) really don't see the problem with paying for sexual activities in the same way that a person could choose to pay for an elaborate meal in a restaurant rather than cook at home, or pay for a counsellor to listen to hours of rambling rather than just getting a grip, or pay to have one's house cleaned rather than doing one's own housework.
For many people, sex needs to be allied with some sort of emotional intensity, fair enough if you are one of those people. But it isn;t the case for everyone. Sex is simply not that big a deal to quite a lot of people, so the constant insistence that having sex for money rather than out of 'love' is inherently wrong and harmful, seems both subjective and misguided.

claig · 08/04/2010 00:03

I am not sure, I understand some of SolidGoldBrass's and MissHoneyMoon's points and I understand some of yours. I am still undecided.

claig · 08/04/2010 00:08

It seems to me that if people wanted it to end, it would not be that hard to do, but it would involve prosecuting the prostitutes as well as the punters. It seems that you want to only target punters. I can't see how that will stop it quickly. It seems to me that without turning the tap off, it will still continue because it will be very difficult to catch all of the potentially millions of punters.

dittany · 08/04/2010 00:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

dittany · 08/04/2010 00:11

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

madwomanintheattic · 08/04/2010 00:15

yes, the wider debate is. i'm interested what individual sex-workers make of that from a personal angle. an insider view, rather than our external one (assuming neither you nor i are members of the sex industry)

the troll thing is irrelevant. i found the other forums quite interesting, so not really a total waste of my time, whether misshm and manda are blokes who work for the grauniad/ pimps or bonafides. it's not like i'm taking notes for my homework .

if i wanted to interview sex-workers in rl i'd find some and check validity - way too many issues with internet forums, and i'm way too familiar with ethical protocols to make anything of an mn thread, whatever random journos might decide is okey doke. but internet forums (not this one lol, but i'm always interested to bookmark more specialist sites) have proved a valuable source of initial contact in the past for all sorts of things, not just research participants. (hopefully dd2 will be able to make her own way in the sexual relationship department, for example)

but yes. you are, of course, right.

society's issue is with the men who buy and sell women.

if misshm and manda had introduced themselves as such, i'd be asking very different questions (and maybe even doing a bit of shouting ). i can get quite worked up, on occasion. honest.

claig · 08/04/2010 00:22

The way I see it is either prostitution is a problem that should be stopped or not. If it is a problem then anything that stops it will be good, and that will mean cutting the supply off, not just trying to reduce the demand.

If drugs are a problem, then you have to cut the supply off i.e. prosecute the dealers as well as any users. It looks like you are just targetting the users, so the potential suppliers will still be around.

It seems that you don't think that it is a very urgent problem that should be immediately stopped, the bigger problem is the men who are the users. Just like the burglars you won't be able to catch them all, so prostitution will still continue and you will be constantly chasing a moving target. Whereas if you wanted to stop it urgently, it could be killed stone dead at the source.

madwomanintheattic · 08/04/2010 00:22

oh blimey, i've missed loads.

i've got to cook the dinner but i'll be back later - re my involvement and punters lol - um, probably pushing 100? of which i've listened to the aftermath of about 35, and asked questions of far less - maybe 10? i think a lot of the use i saw was peer pressure related tbh. but undoubtedly some 'quieter' service users than i was aware of but that kept themselves to themselves. most of them weren't secretive at all lol, but that was probably a lot of bravado and circumstance tbh.

how did i feel about it? impossible to answer in isolation - as i said earlier it appeared to make no difference to my authority at work - they appeared to be able to compartmentalise women who sold from women who didn't... but the waters of the gender pool were far muddier than that.

i'll be back...

dittany · 08/04/2010 00:29

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Molesworth · 08/04/2010 00:29

"If drugs are a problem, then you have to cut the supply off i.e. prosecute the dealers as well as any users. It looks like you are just targetting the users, so the potential suppliers will still be around."

This is a poor analogy claig, because in the case of prostitution the commodity is a human being. The 'dealers' - i.e. pimps, brothel keepers and traffickers - are already breaking the law as it stands.

OP posts:
dittany · 08/04/2010 00:33

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

claig · 08/04/2010 00:37

Molesworth, I disagree with you there. Take MissHoneyMoon, she is a supplier or dealer. In her case there are no pimps, brothel keepers or traffickers. She is the sole supplier providing the service of prostitution by choice. Her provision of prostitution is either a problem or it isn't.
If it is regarded as a problem then she has to be stopped from doing it via prosecution etc.
Any other action is not going to stop the activity.

claig · 08/04/2010 00:41

dittany, it takes two to tango, both the prostitute and the client are taking part.

I can understand your argument if the prostitute has been forced to do the job, but, for example, MissHoneyMoon has not been forced to do it.

Molesworth · 08/04/2010 01:19

Claig, your "it takes two to tango" idea assumes that both parties are equal. Perhaps this can be argued in the case of MissHM, but I don't believe that MissHM's situation is representative of the majority of prostitutes (based on the research findings I've seen). I don't think it's morally defensible to criminalise women (or men) who should properly be regarded as the victims, not perpetrators, of a crime.

I agree with dittany that the Nordic model looks like the best option: criminalise the users and put systems into place to support women (and men) in getting out of prostitution. And as MissHM and Mandamumu have both pointed out, it's essential to address the wider cultural, social and economic factors which drive women (and some men) into prostitution in the first place.

OP posts:
madwomanintheattic · 08/04/2010 01:25

no, lol, of course the main issue (if we are talking about wider issues of gender/ society) is not my authority at work lol. but (again) i'm talking about a much smaller scale of operations.

my subordinates use of sex workers appeared to make no difference to the way they treated me (a woman) at work. it appeared to make no difference to how they treated their wives and children (those that had them), girlfriends, or, women they picked up in bars for free sex. that was kind of my point though - yes it made me feel extremely uneasy, but, on the face of it, there were no noticeable repercussions.

what made me uneasy, of course, were the invisible repercussions - you know, that bigger picture stuff.

not, interestingly, the welfare of the women themselves (again, most of whom appeared to fall into the 'happy hooker' category - largely in bigger european cities. i saw no evidence of any compunction, although do realise that would have been neatly tidied away ). no, i don't know whether the buildings were owned by a co-operative of happy hookers, or a violent landlord/ pimp lol. i say interestingly, because again, with hindsight, i may or may not think differently now.

tbh at the point of most of the transactions, i was more worried if the lads were going to show for work the next morning, and how i was going to explain losing a member of hm forces in the red light district to my boss, if they didn't. with a good dose of 'ffs, keep it in your trousers' on the side.

so, ok, clearly i fell/ fall short of certain idealist principles because i didn't, well... what, exactly? i didn't condone their behaviour - they knew my feelings on the matter (a certain sheepishness of glance as they sidled off, and a refusal to look me in the eye the next morning) but ultimately, i couldn't get the job done by refusing to work with men who use prostitutes. and getting the job done, was, well... my job.

did it bother me? well, obviously it did. i didn't see much of their wives and children, but i was always fascinated by how different they were with their families than out on the razz. ultimately it's why i left. (not use of prostitutes as such, but gender issues as a whole). various allegedly wise senior officers told me i could only change the service from the inside. what they really meant was that i couldn't even change the service from the inside, but that i was a reasonable worker when i wasn't on my high horse, so hang around and do a bit more work, love. but keep your gob shut.

attempting to unravel a single ideology of gender or even prostitution from that trivia is obviously daft. feel free to come up with a good criticism and a much more sensible idea of what i should have done in those circs though (although resigning immediately would have been momentarily satisfying, it wouldn't have a- paid the bills, or b- made much difference to the institution as a whole 'can't take a joke, shouldn't have joined' etc etc.)

claig · 08/04/2010 01:29

If women are trafficked and controlled and forced to do the job, then I agree with you that they cannot be prosecuted because they are victims.

But is MissHoneyMoon also a victim? I guess you would not prosecute MissHoneyMoon, but would you want to prosecute MissHoneyMoon's punters, because this would lead to MissHoneyMoon not being able to carry on with her choice of work?

SolidGoldBrass · 08/04/2010 01:40

Dittany: your posts do come across as though you see sex as something horrifying and totally apart from all other kinds of human activity. Not everyone sees it this way. For instance, paying for an elaborate meal in a restaurant is not a bad thing but people might want to consider and wonder whether the food they are eating was produced by victims of trafficking working under threat of violence, whether the people in the kitchens washing the pots are working for pennies, sleeping 10 to a room and working under constant threat of violence... Is that really less worrying you than the thought that some people pay for sex with a non-coerced person who is happy to supply it for money because to that individual having sex is simply not a big deal?

Molesworth · 08/04/2010 01:40

Well, I'm waiting for MissHM to come and shout at me about depriving her of her livelihood, and yes, that would be the effect of criminalising the purchase of sex from a prostitute. On 1st April it became a crime to purchase sex from a prostitute who has been subjected to force or coercion, so that is already illegal. Is this enough? I don't know. You have what I think is an overly black/white view of what counts as coercion. I think that if a person is driven into prostitution by a combination of socio-economic factors (childhood abuse, domestic violence, poverty, drug use etc) then I don't see that that person has made a free 'choice' to become a prostitute in the way that MissHM has, yet nor have they been forced on threat of death to do it. If it were possible to address the combination of wider factors such as those listed above to the point that no-one had to 'choose' prostitution, well, that would be great. But these are complex problems which aren't going to be solved easily.

OP posts:
claig · 08/04/2010 01:52

I used to know a prostitute and she was tricked and lured into the industry. Once she started, she carried on, because the money was good. But she was free to leave if she wanted to. I think most young women are lured into it or pimped into it and do not enter it out of free choice, unlike mandamumu who has never met a single prostitute who didn't enter it out of free choice, which I find to be somewhat amazing.

Molesworth · 08/04/2010 02:03

That last post was in answer to claig, btw.

SGB, I'm thinking out loud here so please do pick what I'm saying apart as no doubt it is full of holes. I find some of your points persuasive, but I think the problem is that you're lifting prostitution out of its existing context of gender inequality and viewing the sale of sex in a purified, theoretical sort of way. In a hypothetical context of gender equality it might be possible to view the sale/purchase of sex as a neutral transaction in the way you are suggesting, but in reality the sale/purchase of sex goes on in a context of entrenched gender inequality and therefore it can't be regarded as a neutral transaction. It's not about being a prude, being anti-sex or thinking that sex should only take place in the context of a particular type of relationship (that's Mary Whitehouse territory). For me, it's about the damaging effects of this sort of commodification of women's bodies in terms of the direct harm it does to many (note wrt MissHM et al: not all) prostitutes and in terms of the harm it does to us all in perpetuating gender inequality.

Apologies for garbled post: it's v late

OP posts:
Sakura · 08/04/2010 02:41

Well if we want to pretend its just an "industry" like any other, the whole damn industry should be closed down for being ageist. Why don't 55 year old women suddenly decided to enter this industry? Hmm, apart from the fact she's emotionally less vulnerable due to maturity and probably economically in a better situation, its because men, who dictate the terms of the industry, wouldn't pay to have sex with her when they could pay for a young 18 year old.

I think being young and that the majority of prostitutes are young is a HUGE, huge issue that a lot of proponents of prostitution are glossing over. Young people are in a more vulnerable position than other members of society. They haven't paid off their mortgage yet, they don't have a lot of life experience etc. If a 55 year old woman felt that entering prostitution was her "calling", I would probably have no qualms about that, given her life experience. But the fact that most of the women in the industry are so young is a big issue for me.

Sakura · 08/04/2010 02:49

If my daughter came to me and told me she wanted to be a prostitute, I would talk her out of it, not encourage it. I think you would have to be a very strange type of woman to be happy that your daughter is a prostitute. To pat her on the back and say "well done", I think you're making the most of your brains and your life.
On the other hand I think it'd be normal if you were happy that your daughter was a nurse or a doctor, a teacher or a designer.

I'll never be convinced that a woman who wants her daughter to be a prostitute is normal in the head. Those who are defending prostitution as being a "choice" that empowers women, please try to imagine why that would be. Clue: its not because I'm sexually repressed, or because I look down on prostitutes.

Sakura · 08/04/2010 02:57

MissHOneyMoon's post at 19:27 has me fully convinced he's a man. Well, one reason, I'm a writer and study writing carefully. In general men and women write differently. Its a different voice. Pick up any mainstream novel, you can often tell.