4 ms·

>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 liv

>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'.

4 ms·

>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 liv

by Oxitendwe 9y ago

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'.