4 ms·

What do you have against female autonomy? How is sex work inherently in conflict with "concern for human welfare"?

Chris2048 9y ago
female autonomy? Is that how you're framing it? 1) Many sex workers have little choice 2) It also legitimises sex as a labour asset, increasing gender inequality
- Mz 9y ago
  Making it illegal harms female autonomy. They become victims of their pimps. Pimping is much harder to prove than prostitution. When it is illegal, it is usually the women who are hurt by it. I will add that there is nothing inherently gendered about sex work. Your assumption that it must be a male customer and female sex worker is problematic and, itself, biased.
  - Chris2048 9y ago
    Strange this gets labelled 'autonomy' when every other law in the books restricts human autonomy just as much. > They become victims of their pimps This is a tangent to the illegality of prostitution itself. > here is nothing inherently gendered about sex work In absolute terms, but what about statistically? Tell me why it is 'problematic' not to derail the issue.
    - belorn 9y ago
      We could also call regulation and safety laws gendered because statistically men work more often in unsafe and dangerous environments. When people (practically all men) was exploited to work in coal mines by debt slavery, the solution was not to abolish the mining industry. The deaths, the humiliation and the low value of (poor, young) males life were resolved in the US by identifying the most exploitable aspects of those practices and surgely removing it by regulation. Give the sex industry the same treatment. Regulate away the worst part and tax it heavily so money can be rerouted into making it even safer in a self-sustaining way.
      - Chris2048 9y ago
        > We could also call regulation and safety laws gendered because statistically men work more often in unsafe and dangerous environments. A valid point, and one worth addressing in its own right. Why should the sex industry be given the same treatment? The lives of young, poor men are disregarded, and you want to emulate this for some reason? Seems like we should be condemning unsafe vocations instead.. But this is a bit of a tangent.
- chillwaves 9y ago
  When prostitution is illegal, they are not able to receive the protection of society and the police. They are not able (or are discouraged) from taking advantage of social welfare programs. We are taking an already vulnerable and preyed upon population and essentially throwing them to the wolves. Lastly, how does legitimizing sex trade increase gender inequality except perhaps by empowering women (who are in considerably higher demand in this respect)? I'm not seeing the problem in #2. Maybe you can help me.
  - Chris2048 9y ago
    > When prostitution is illegal, they are not able to receive the protection of society and the police Not true. > except perhaps by empowering women 'empowering' how?
- Oxitendwe 9y ago
  >Many sex workers have little choice But some do, why would you take away their ability to make money? Do you think they'll thank you for taking away their livelihood? > It also legitimises sex as a labour asset, increasing gender inequality The vast majority of sex workers are female, meaning there is a much smaller market for males and so it is more difficult for them to make money. Is that what you meant by inequality? In any case, why shouldn't sex be a labor asset? This goes back to my original comment - what DO you have against female autonomy?
  - Chris2048 9y ago
    > Why would you take away their ability to make money? And why should anyone pay tax? Or obey the law? > Is that what you meant by inequality? In part, yes. And that hard-labor for men isn't at all similar. > why shouldn't sex be a labor asset? Why shouldn't having a vagina imply the burden of having to use it? Please stop talking about 'female autonomy', it's a BS framing of the issue.
    - Chris2048 9y ago
      To be clear: 1) In the case of someone who chooses to be a prostitute freely, (without desperation): that's fine, but then the issue is entirely different; namely that the populace determinate what should be permitted within its borders, and it's economy, e.g. I can make more money if I didn't pay tax, but that's doesn't mean it's an option; likewise, some women may freely pursue sex work, but not in a country that bars that economy. 2) specifically in the case of free, un-coerced choice; why should a female student be able to fund their studies through sex when most male students can't? Why would society encourage the explicit monetisation of sex? 3) My opinion is that having a vagina shouldn't imply the burden of having to use it, and I'm saying that's what it means to consider sex/genitalia a 'labour asset'.

Chris2048 9y ago

female autonomy? Is that how you're framing it? 1) Many sex workers have little choice 2) It also legitimises sex as a labour asset, increasing gender inequality

Mz 9y ago
Making it illegal harms female autonomy. They become victims of their pimps. Pimping is much harder to prove than prostitution. When it is illegal, it is usually the women who are hurt by it. I will add that there is nothing inherently gendered about sex work. Your assumption that it must be a male customer and female sex worker is problematic and, itself, biased.
- Chris2048 9y ago
  Strange this gets labelled 'autonomy' when every other law in the books restricts human autonomy just as much. > They become victims of their pimps This is a tangent to the illegality of prostitution itself. > here is nothing inherently gendered about sex work In absolute terms, but what about statistically? Tell me why it is 'problematic' not to derail the issue.
  - belorn 9y ago
    We could also call regulation and safety laws gendered because statistically men work more often in unsafe and dangerous environments. When people (practically all men) was exploited to work in coal mines by debt slavery, the solution was not to abolish the mining industry. The deaths, the humiliation and the low value of (poor, young) males life were resolved in the US by identifying the most exploitable aspects of those practices and surgely removing it by regulation. Give the sex industry the same treatment. Regulate away the worst part and tax it heavily so money can be rerouted into making it even safer in a self-sustaining way.
    - Chris2048 9y ago
      > We could also call regulation and safety laws gendered because statistically men work more often in unsafe and dangerous environments. A valid point, and one worth addressing in its own right. Why should the sex industry be given the same treatment? The lives of young, poor men are disregarded, and you want to emulate this for some reason? Seems like we should be condemning unsafe vocations instead.. But this is a bit of a tangent.
chillwaves 9y ago
When prostitution is illegal, they are not able to receive the protection of society and the police. They are not able (or are discouraged) from taking advantage of social welfare programs. We are taking an already vulnerable and preyed upon population and essentially throwing them to the wolves. Lastly, how does legitimizing sex trade increase gender inequality except perhaps by empowering women (who are in considerably higher demand in this respect)? I'm not seeing the problem in #2. Maybe you can help me.
- Chris2048 9y ago
  > When prostitution is illegal, they are not able to receive the protection of society and the police Not true. > except perhaps by empowering women 'empowering' how?
Oxitendwe 9y ago
>Many sex workers have little choice But some do, why would you take away their ability to make money? Do you think they'll thank you for taking away their livelihood? > It also legitimises sex as a labour asset, increasing gender inequality The vast majority of sex workers are female, meaning there is a much smaller market for males and so it is more difficult for them to make money. Is that what you meant by inequality? In any case, why shouldn't sex be a labor asset? This goes back to my original comment - what DO you have against female autonomy?
- Chris2048 9y ago
  > Why would you take away their ability to make money? And why should anyone pay tax? Or obey the law? > Is that what you meant by inequality? In part, yes. And that hard-labor for men isn't at all similar. > why shouldn't sex be a labor asset? Why shouldn't having a vagina imply the burden of having to use it? Please stop talking about 'female autonomy', it's a BS framing of the issue.
  - Chris2048 9y ago
    To be clear: 1) In the case of someone who chooses to be a prostitute freely, (without desperation): that's fine, but then the issue is entirely different; namely that the populace determinate what should be permitted within its borders, and it's economy, e.g. I can make more money if I didn't pay tax, but that's doesn't mean it's an option; likewise, some women may freely pursue sex work, but not in a country that bars that economy. 2) specifically in the case of free, un-coerced choice; why should a female student be able to fund their studies through sex when most male students can't? Why would society encourage the explicit monetisation of sex? 3) My opinion is that having a vagina shouldn't imply the burden of having to use it, and I'm saying that's what it means to consider sex/genitalia a 'labour asset'.