6 ms·

Everything that has to do with money is some sort of power imbalance. Boss pays you for the power to direct your energies. Taxes. Customers pay you to do thi

Everything that has to do with money is some sort of power imbalance. Boss pays you for the power to direct your energies. Taxes. Customers pay you to do things. Just because it’s related to sex does not make it more of an imbalance. And no - don’t get it twisted, I’m not advocating for this specific power imbalance.

tantalor 5y ago
The real villain was capitalism all along?! Who's been messin' up everything...
- eric4smith 5y ago
  In the absence of capitalism there were more openly worse power imbalances such as slavery. Serfs. Selling of children. Communism. Give me the power imbalance that rewards me instead of forced labor any day.
  - karpierz 5y ago
    Why are you contrasting slavery with capitalism when it was, and still is part of capitalism?
    - tantalor 5y ago
      Yeah, it is literally called the "slave trade".
      - mc32 5y ago
        So there were no slaves under barter or pre-barter economies? Armies didn't take people and put them to work if they didn't kill them? All of this precedes "capitalism" and also existed in non-capitalist economies. What were gulags and other such mechanisms if not enslavement with added mortality?
        rjsw 5y ago
        Are there any examples of barter or pre-barter economies ? I thought there was evidence that money was invented fairly early to be able to keep track of what goods or services had been exchanged.
        karpierz 5y ago
        Slavery isn't particular to capitalism, but definitely is not in contrast to it or separate from it. Even if you relegate it to far-off countries and simply import goods from them without asking how the goods were made.
    - spoonjim 5y ago
      “Capitalism” as a concept (rather than a reality) does not allow for nonconsensual transactions like slavery. (Unless you sell yourself into slavery to get money for someone else).
      - karpierz 5y ago
        Communism as a concept doesn't allow for power imbalances. I don't think some idealized version of capitalism is particularly useful here.
- mc32 5y ago
  That's too facile an answer. If you can't do it via "capitalism" you do it via corruption or repurpose other structures. Do you need more flour or milk for your family? Do you want your kids to get accepted at a university rather than trade school?
mc32 5y ago
Yes, we can see power imbalances wherever we look. Food, plant vs the grazer. Never the less, I think some are more one-sided and extreme than others. Some are more productive than others. Here these customers are setting out the rules such as "exclusivity" privileges, emotional privileges and more.
whimsicalism 5y ago
Why is it generally bad for bosses to solicit sex from their employees? Clearly there is something distinguishing some power imbalances from others.
- incrudible 5y ago
  > Why is it generally bad for bosses to solicit sex from their employees? Because, unlike a sugar baby, that's not what the employee signed up for.
  - whimsicalism 5y ago
    They can quit, generally one's job role doesn't stay entirely static. Oftentimes, a role changes to something that an employee didn't sign up for. Perhaps there is something unique about sex and how it interacts with power dynamics? I want to capture the intuition that we generally all share around stuff like this. A statement like > Just because it’s related to sex does not make it more of an imbalance. does not seem to capture this intuition that most people hold.
    - incrudible 5y ago
      > Oftentimes, a role changes to something that an employee didn't sign up for. ...which is also generally bad if the role is materially different and goes on top of what was signed up for, with little to no extra compensation. > Perhaps there is something unique about sex and how it interacts with power dynamics? Suppose that your boss asked you, in addition to your current duties, instead of giving sexual favors, you follow him home and do all his laundry - with the same implication that your career hinges on it. Would that change the power dynamic? I don't think so. The only thing that "sex" changes is that it arouses attention.
      - whimsicalism 5y ago
        Yes, I think it would be worse if my boss said I must have sex with them in order to keep my job than if they asked me to do their laundry. Both are bad, but I disagree with your moral intuition - and suspect most people would as well. The key moral fact here is more than just "it's not what you signed up for"
boh 5y ago
Just because you're getting paid to do things does not imply the power balance is the same. As in, if you're an accountant, a lawyer, a doctor, a financial advisor etc. you have power over your customer/patient's/client's well-being as much as they do yours. You are also granted rights based on these relationships, which are not present in acts of prostitution.

tantalor 5y ago

The real villain was capitalism all along?! Who's been messin' up everything...

eric4smith 5y ago
In the absence of capitalism there were more openly worse power imbalances such as slavery. Serfs. Selling of children. Communism. Give me the power imbalance that rewards me instead of forced labor any day.
- karpierz 5y ago
  Why are you contrasting slavery with capitalism when it was, and still is part of capitalism?
  - tantalor 5y ago
    Yeah, it is literally called the "slave trade".
    - mc32 5y ago
      So there were no slaves under barter or pre-barter economies? Armies didn't take people and put them to work if they didn't kill them? All of this precedes "capitalism" and also existed in non-capitalist economies. What were gulags and other such mechanisms if not enslavement with added mortality?
      - rjsw 5y ago
        Are there any examples of barter or pre-barter economies ? I thought there was evidence that money was invented fairly early to be able to keep track of what goods or services had been exchanged.
      - karpierz 5y ago
        Slavery isn't particular to capitalism, but definitely is not in contrast to it or separate from it. Even if you relegate it to far-off countries and simply import goods from them without asking how the goods were made.
  - spoonjim 5y ago
    “Capitalism” as a concept (rather than a reality) does not allow for nonconsensual transactions like slavery. (Unless you sell yourself into slavery to get money for someone else).
    - karpierz 5y ago
      Communism as a concept doesn't allow for power imbalances. I don't think some idealized version of capitalism is particularly useful here.
mc32 5y ago
That's too facile an answer. If you can't do it via "capitalism" you do it via corruption or repurpose other structures. Do you need more flour or milk for your family? Do you want your kids to get accepted at a university rather than trade school?

mc32 5y ago

Yes, we can see power imbalances wherever we look. Food, plant vs the grazer. Never the less, I think some are more one-sided and extreme than others. Some are more productive than others. Here these customers are setting out the rules such as "exclusivity" privileges, emotional privileges and more.

whimsicalism 5y ago

Why is it generally bad for bosses to solicit sex from their employees? Clearly there is something distinguishing some power imbalances from others.

incrudible 5y ago
> Why is it generally bad for bosses to solicit sex from their employees? Because, unlike a sugar baby, that's not what the employee signed up for.
- whimsicalism 5y ago
  They can quit, generally one's job role doesn't stay entirely static. Oftentimes, a role changes to something that an employee didn't sign up for. Perhaps there is something unique about sex and how it interacts with power dynamics? I want to capture the intuition that we generally all share around stuff like this. A statement like > Just because it’s related to sex does not make it more of an imbalance. does not seem to capture this intuition that most people hold.
  - incrudible 5y ago
    > Oftentimes, a role changes to something that an employee didn't sign up for. ...which is also generally bad if the role is materially different and goes on top of what was signed up for, with little to no extra compensation. > Perhaps there is something unique about sex and how it interacts with power dynamics? Suppose that your boss asked you, in addition to your current duties, instead of giving sexual favors, you follow him home and do all his laundry - with the same implication that your career hinges on it. Would that change the power dynamic? I don't think so. The only thing that "sex" changes is that it arouses attention.
    - whimsicalism 5y ago
      Yes, I think it would be worse if my boss said I must have sex with them in order to keep my job than if they asked me to do their laundry. Both are bad, but I disagree with your moral intuition - and suspect most people would as well. The key moral fact here is more than just "it's not what you signed up for"

boh 5y ago

Just because you're getting paid to do things does not imply the power balance is the same. As in, if you're an accountant, a lawyer, a doctor, a financial advisor etc. you have power over your customer/patient's/client's well-being as much as they do yours. You are also granted rights based on these relationships, which are not present in acts of prostitution.