3 ms·

>My question to most people on this forum are: would you really be ok if your daughter was best friends with a sex worker? Everybody says "of course!" in theory

>My question to most people on this forum are: would you really be ok if your daughter was best friends with a sex worker? Everybody says "of course!" in theory... but in reality I think it falls apart. Lots of blurred moral lines. I have more respect for a sex worker than someone who builds unconstitutional mass surveillance tools. At least most sex work is legal. I think the only "blurred moral line" wrt sex work is that folks who were supportive of gay rights, marijuana legalization, and other individual freedoms then pump the brakes on their social libertarianism as soon as the chance to support a vulnerable population appears that may actually require politely but firmly disagreeing with folks they personally know.

MuffinFlavored 6y ago
> but firmly disagreeing with folks they personally know. That's what I'm trying to poke at here in these comments. It's almost as if you do not support sex work/aren't ok with the theory of having it in your household, you're the enemy. You aren't cool, you're behind the curve, and you need to work on yourself to get your views more in line with the rest of the more liberal folk. That's how it reads to me anyway.
- dontbenebby 6y ago
  Well to be frank, you do seem rigid in your thinking. For example, I pointed you at a noted libertarian think tank earlier in the thread, and you basically ignored my post and continue to describe being for the decriminalization of sex work as a "liberal" mindset. Most political scientists reject the left right dichotomy altogether and use a "political compass" instead. You seem to be posting from the "authoritarian right" quadrant: https://www.politicalcompass.org https://www.politicalcompass.org Maybe if you adjusted your attitudes based on data, rather than insist your views are right because they are your views, you'd feel less uncool or "behind the curve".
  - MuffinFlavored 6y ago
    I just don't get how you can't abstract away the fact that: 1. the right have their political compass point to Christianity, guns, less government, anti-homosexuality, anti-abortion 2. the left have their compass point to redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor for social programs through taxes, support for transgenders, democratic socialism, etc. I just feel like the 'compass' thing is saying what is already obvious in a different fashion. Am I missing something?

MuffinFlavored 6y ago

> but firmly disagreeing with folks they personally know. That's what I'm trying to poke at here in these comments. It's almost as if you do not support sex work/aren't ok with the theory of having it in your household, you're the enemy. You aren't cool, you're behind the curve, and you need to work on yourself to get your views more in line with the rest of the more liberal folk. That's how it reads to me anyway.

dontbenebby 6y ago
Well to be frank, you do seem rigid in your thinking. For example, I pointed you at a noted libertarian think tank earlier in the thread, and you basically ignored my post and continue to describe being for the decriminalization of sex work as a "liberal" mindset. Most political scientists reject the left right dichotomy altogether and use a "political compass" instead. You seem to be posting from the "authoritarian right" quadrant: https://www.politicalcompass.org https://www.politicalcompass.org Maybe if you adjusted your attitudes based on data, rather than insist your views are right because they are your views, you'd feel less uncool or "behind the curve".
- MuffinFlavored 6y ago
  I just don't get how you can't abstract away the fact that: 1. the right have their political compass point to Christianity, guns, less government, anti-homosexuality, anti-abortion 2. the left have their compass point to redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor for social programs through taxes, support for transgenders, democratic socialism, etc. I just feel like the 'compass' thing is saying what is already obvious in a different fashion. Am I missing something?