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

[Molesworth]

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?

[OldLadyKnowsNothing]

"When you sell your body, you tell the person purchasing that they don't need to act in a appealing/attractive/respectful manner, so long as they have the cash."

Hmm, I'm not sure that BdJ (or others like her) would agree; I've certainly read (on the dreaded punternet, no less) of plenty of "independent escorts", as well as women working (voluntarily) in parlours/brothels who say that the first sign of disrespect has the punter shown the door, and blacklisted. Apparently, the two main requisites for punters is that they are clean and respectful; physical attractiveness is obviously not an issue.

So, if sex workers agree to have sex with clean and respectful punters, but turns away unwashed wankers, isn't she starting to improve working conditions for other sex workers?

[OldLadyKnowsNothing]

(Sorry, got my plurals mixed up there)

[Grandhighpoohba]

No, she is sending the unwashed wankers to those who have less ability to say no - those in forced prostitution, or those with a drug habit to feed.

[Molesworth]

GHPB and dittany, I completely agree with your points.

I suppose it boils down to whether or not you agree that the use of a person as a sexual object is intrinsically harmful and/or has harmful consequences on a wider scale (i.e. perpetuating the oppression of women), and also whether or not you agree that there is some 'natural' and immutable 'need' which creates the demand for sex as a commodity, and so if this 'need' is not met, there will be harmful consequences (eg the argument that without some 'legitimate' outlet for their sexual 'needs' some men might fulfil those 'needs' illegitimately). Or am I missing other fundamental issues?

[ilovemydogandmrobama]

In a decriminalized environment, what is the offense? Buying sex, and not selling it? Wonder if it's mainly fines, community service, although for a lot of men, it's the shame.

[Grandhighpoohba]

Yes, Molesworth, but I also think it has to do with the false idea that feminism = absolute freedom of choice. As in, as a woman I should have the right to do what ever I please with my own body. I would argue that there are limits within an ethical society as to what choices can be permitted, not just by women, but by any member of society. If your choice has no impact on any other person at all, then fine. If your choice has consequences for others, then those choices must be examined. Some choices have too great a consequence for others to be an acceptable, moral act. I believe that using one's body as a comodity is one of those choices.

[OldLadyKnowsNothing]

How about selling alcohol and tobacco? Aren't those acts with serious consequences for others?

[Grandhighpoohba]

Agree, dittany, that using the law to attack those who pay for sex, or profit from others is the most appropriate action. Most women involved in prostitution are not making a free choice, and should not be taking the blame for their own exploitation.

BdJ and her like on the otherhand, do hold some of the blame for the exploitation of other women, and although I'm not convinced they should be prosecuted for it (how would you seperate them from those with no choice in the matter) I do think they are behaving immoraly,(sp)and not in a feminist manner.

[Molesworth]

OLKN, the smoking ban is justified on that same basis: that one person's choice to smoke has harmful consequences to others in public places. Similarly, there's a ban on alcohol on the tube, for example (and an argument could be made for more restrictions on alcohol, I think). So restriction can be justified on the same 'harm principle', yes. But I'd say that what goes on in the sex industry has more broadly harmful consequences in terms of violence against women and gender inequality in general.

[MissHoneyMoon]

Sadly, in the media there seems little balance or actually sensible reporting of the sex industry. Usually, journalists focus on sensationalist stories of enforced prostitution and trafficking. Undeniably that is one rather sad part of an overall massive global industry. But if anyone is focusing on for example the plight of these girls in Bangladesh than one should not forget that overall women there have few rights. The abuse of these girls forms part of a much wider mistreatment of the overall entire female gender. Neither situation so forms any basis for self appointed feminist moral apostles to fight or talk on behalf of UK sex workers! The biggest problem the likes of Julie Bindel have that there is a growing group of intelligent highly qualified group of ?self employed? escorts/sex workers who do not need ?rescuing? and resent being patronised. Sadly, the figures quoted for UK victims of sex trafficking are as reliable as most statistics, having once as a student worked for a few research companies I know all too well that research tends to consist of having a brief and then falsifying the great majority of results to meet the deadline. My so-called consumer research/works of utter fiction had really no impact but in the case of arbitrary totally inflated figures of sex trafficking victims that sadly means that lazy shoddy journalism perpetrates and quotes wrong figures over and over that in turn cause knee jerk reactions of politicians who tend to actually if anything make it unsafe and harder for any lady to work in this industry on her own volition.

The biggest issue a lot of feminist spokespersons have is the notion that anyone chooses to work voluntarily and gladly in the sex industry. Seems to me those that are most vocal have if anything a troubled attitude towards hetero sex anyway see Ms Bindel or that neurotic American writer Andrea Dworkin. If you actually took some of their more radical concepts to full conclusion than any relationship that gives a woman some financial security is a form of prostitution...

I have been working as an escort for the past 2 years and my only regret is that I have not started earlier. I am 41 and ?curvaceous? or to put it bluntly a little too short for my weight.... Men, including quite a number of younger and well adjusted attractive guys pay me £180 an hour or £320 for 2 hours or £1,000 a night for sex and often simply inter-human affection. And I actually have on the whole better sex now than I had in my long term relationships. Ironically, guys treat a lot of us ladies better with more respect than those trying to get free sex via adult dating! The only lack of respect I seem to encounter are from journalists and politicians who try to deny me the right to actually contradict their propaganda that we are all forced into prostitution. I find it far more perverse that there is still such a huge chasm in average salaries in higher positions among men and women. However, as an ?escort? I can earn a very decent wage for relative few hours. There is nothing exploitative about the chance to spend a lot of free time with my loved ones while working a mere few hours a week. I run a business that includes all aspects of marketing my site, scheduling appointments, renting ?business? premises. As such I feel being an independent woman working in the sex industry does not contradict being a true feminist!

[Grandhighpoohba]

Yes, OLKN, they are, which is why there are restrictions to their sale, and a conversation as to whether they should be legal.

Tobacco would never be legal if it were discovered now, its a cultural thing, and appears to be gradually becoming less and less acceptable. This is because of its consequences on others. I can choose to smoke, but that has consequences for others, which the law currently seeks to minimise.

Alcohol, one can make the same argument. (not stating where I stand on that, haven't really thought about it

[Grandhighpoohba]

MissHoneyMoon, I didn't suggest you were being exploited, or in need of rescue. I suggested that your free choices have an impact on the lives of other less free women, which is what I find objectionable.

And your arguments against that are that you don't believe the research about exploitation, and that those who disagree with you have a "troubled" relationship with heterosexual sex

[MissHoneyMoon]

Thank you very much for your lovely welcome. I wanted to add some sense of the mundane and normality to a debate on sex work. Usually, there seems to be two extremes when the media or indeed people debate prostitution. It seems to be either drug addicted street workers and or trafficked victims on one end or preposterous story lines about Belle de Jour wannabes. In reality, there are so many different ladies out there of all ages and shapes, as well as backgrounds.

I think rational and sensible discussion of sex work gets high jacked by latter day moral do-gooders en par with the patronising behaviour for example missionaries or Victorians had who wanted to rescue fallen women. Neither actually gave women many rights of self determination. Hence it is ironic that so many feminists treat us sex workers in the same manner by ignoring what we have to say and trying to gag us lest we contradict their concept and myth that all paid sex is akin to rape and an act of exploitation.

[comixminx]

Glad to hear from someone who has some personal experience and viewpoints to bear on this, MissHoneyMoon. As you point out, a lot of these debates either ignore or gag what sex workers have to say.

I understand from friends who have worked in advocacy / support projects for sex workers (eg ScotPep) that the Scandinavian model of prosecuting pimps and punters is itself troublesome, as something that drives the workers off populated streets and into areas where they are more vulnerable. Do you know more about this? I have heard the discussions but not absorbed all the nuances.

[OldLadyKnowsNothing]

"BdJ and her like on the otherhand, do hold some of the blame for the exploitation of other women, and although I'm not convinced they should be prosecuted for it (how would you seperate them from those with no choice in the matter) I do think they are behaving immoraly,(sp)and not in a feminist manner."

I'm sorry, I really don't and can't understand this. Women who have nothing to do with exploitative sex, are to be blamed for it? How about leaving the blame with the nasty, unwashed, disrespectful men who exploit vulnerable women?

[Grandhighpoohba]

Again, Misshoneymoon, am not suggesting that you are in need of rescue. Am suggesting that there are limits to self determination in a civilised, moral society, for anyone, be they male or female.

Given the great range of sex workers out there, what makes you feel that you are in a position to speak for sex workers as a whole? What insight does your experience of making a free choice to be well paid give you into the lives of other sex workers?

[Mandamumu]

Good evening MissHoneyMoon. Welcome to Mumsnet

[OldLadyKnowsNothing]

"I suppose it boils down to whether or not you agree that the use of a person as a sexual object is intrinsically harmful..."

And I don't understand that one, either. I see it used again and again in feminist arguments about the sex trade generally - whether prostitutes/escorts or lapdancers, and it seems to be the bottom line for feminists that it is. But I simply cannot agree.

Can someone explain to me why it is considered degrading and so on? Surely some women get a buzz out of it?

[Mandamumu]

Oh, so now all independent escorts are at fault for not seeing the unsuitable clients because then these guys will rattle off down the road to a coerced lady...

Ok then, next time a man who strikes you as a bit dodgy chats you up, you must have sex with him. Just because you are assertive, that doesn't mean you should send him off to a less assertive girl..

While you're at it. Please ban all hetero relationships because some involve domestic violence.

[Grandhighpoohba]

OLKN, my point was that these women do not have nothing to do with exploitative sex, whilst they themselves may not be exploited, their choices make the situation worse for others. I only focused on them, because it was the area you raised for discussion.

I agree however, that far more of the blame lies with the men who pay for sex, and it is them that should be prosecuted.

Am off to bed, will be back tomorrow. Will be interesting to see where this discussion goes...

[MissHoneyMoon]

Dear Grandhighpoohba, I did not personally address you but merely spoke of journalists and/or politicians that actually do approach me and my ?colleagues? with such notions that I needed rescuing and being stopped from exploitation without affording me the simple respect of actually listening of what I have to say. Likewise it seems you have not really researched nor really have any clue about what I do as my profession ? you also appear not to have studied a lot of the contemporary or recent feminist works. And you have not been able it seems to actually comprehend what I actually said.

I am not responsible or in any form contribute to the suffering or exploitation of women forced into prostitution. If anything my free choice and actual availability could mean my service would in fact possibly mean someone else was not doing it involuntarily. Trafficking in this country actually covers a lot of industries, I did not say sexual slavery did not exist ? I however do state that figures that are bandied about are grossly misrepresented and instead of actually doing some research ? many journalists repeat those figures instead of actually checking them. As someone actually in the industry I have a fairly good understanding that the great majority of my colleagues are working out of their own free will.

I am as shocked and upset about women and men as well as children being abused and exploited. Sadly, few headlines are devoted to the thousands of faceless virtual slaves who form the massive underbelly of UK?s hospitality or tourism industry, not to mention thousands of trafficked agricultural ?migrant? workers picking fruit in Kent etc. However, their plight simply is not as salacious or has the same moral crusaders. Hence I am as implicated with my work choice with regards to victims of sexual slavery as anyone who eats in one of Europe?s thousands of restaurants, uses a hotel or indeed eats Tesco?s? or other supermarket strawberries of impacting on the lives of these trafficked slave workers.

And it would be good if people actually bothered to read what I took the trouble to write instead of jumping to conclusions and misquoting me. I do not suggest that anyone who disagreed with me has a troubled hetero sexual relationship ? however, if you read some feminist writings such as by Dworking et all they actually do!

[LaurieFairyCake]

Yes dittany I do agree with decriminilisation of prostitutes and prosecution of pimps/punters who exploit them - that is much better than legalisation.

I did not know that about Lopes quite surprised. Thanks for that.

[Mandamumu]

sigh

Does it matter who founded it?

The IUSW does have members who are independent escorts and being a man who is a sexworker and also runs an escort agency (a very good one, I hear) does not preclude one from being a damn good person.