Feminist viewpoints on prostitution and sex work Volume 2

108 posts / 0 new
Last post
G. Muffin

Stargazer wrote:
G. Pie, you do not get to dictate whom and when I can discuss this with.

I was not dictating.  Just suggesting that maybe you should talk to someone else since you don't seem to be getting anything out of this dialogue.  If I said "Have a nice day!" would you respond "How dare you tell me what kind of day to have!"?

Quote:
I put up many posts, links and rational ideas. You twisted yourself in knots trying to get out of some and justify your opinions. I won't be the one doing any editing or changing of my posts.

Nope, no backtracking, no twisting, no editing posts, nothing to see here.  I've been completely up front with my views on the sex trade.

Quote:
I'm not taking this personally, but I can see you are.

I'm afraid you've lost me here.  How am I "taking this personally"?  I don't have a dog in this fight.  I'm not a sex worker and I'm never going to be a sex worker. 

susan davis

i have an idea...let's get rid of sanctimonius elitism and exclusion. we would all be better for it.

 if you seriously believe that after 6000 years of recorded human history you are going to be able to "end the sex industry" in 2 years...you are out of your mind. these attitudes are whats killing us. perhaps you are happy with outcomes of trying to "end sex work".....my friends are dead. all over the world people and governments agree, that criminalizing us is killing us but yet you want to continue.....why do you hate us so much?

you sure seem to be an authority on who is competent and who isn't....have you turned your lense on yourselfl?how to you measure up ? are you on medication? ever been the victim of a crime? this type of discussion is dangerous, who decides this line of competancy?

this has no basis in reality and will only serve to further opress and harm my community.

wage zombie

G. Pie wrote:

wage zombie wrote:
So i'm still a bit confused--is a drug addicted prostitute who is selling sex for drugs or money to buy drugs making a choice to do so?

I think of it as her drug addiction making the choice, not her.

I guess once she's "had enough of her lifestyle" she'll start making choices for herself then.

G. Muffin

wage zombie wrote:

G. Pie wrote:

wage zombie wrote:
So i'm still a bit confused--is a drug addicted prostitute who is selling sex for drugs or money to buy drugs making a choice to do so?

I think of it as her drug addiction making the choice, not her.

I guess once she's "had enough of her lifestyle" she'll start making choices for herself then.

It does happen. 

Loretta

wage zombie wrote:

So, for example, some here are in favour of decrim for sex workers and not for their clients.  Decriminalize women, the act of selling sex, because we don't want to punish prosituted women for trying to survive in their situation.  But leave buying sex crimimalized, because it's objectionable behaviour that encourages the objectification and commodicfication of women's bodies in society as a whole.  And because many here have no concern whatsoever for men who are inconvenienced because their personal desire to buy access to women's bodies is illegal.

Now as a moral argument this is quite coherent and one that proponents can feelpretty good about having.  Loretta, please correct me if i'm wrong, i feel this is close to your position.

Yes.

wage zombie wrote:

The problem is that this morally coherent argument is not very workable at all.  And sex workers posting here have explained why.  Sure, if a sex worker on the street has a legal right to negotiate in public that's great--but if her prospective client does not have the legal right to do so, then it's not going to work.  If the guy in the car does not have the legal right to negotiate in public then he's not going to do so.  So "the sex worker on the street", the one that everyone cares about, is going to be forced to get in the car before being able to set her rates and limits.  This puts her in very precarious position.

The scenario has been brought up several times but i have not seen it addressed.  The moral argument feels good but it does nothing to change the status quo.

It does, actually. First, there is a difference between a street worker having a "legal right" to negotiate the exchange of money for sex, and a street worker not getting arrested for that action. Full decriminalization is a proposal that means no strings attached, from what I've read here but I'm open to correction. Legalization would give a street worker a legal right but would also come with regulation, etc. I'm under the impression that the proponents of these major changes prefer the former but again, I stand to be corrected.

Having said that, partial decriminalization prevents those who get paid to have sex from getting arrested herself. This has the short term benefit to her in avoiding incarceration and a long term benefit of avoiding a criminal record. Also, one would think that, if she is not subject to prosecution, she would be more able to report problem customers or bosses.

wage zombie wrote:

Advocates of partial decrim (for the sex worker only) have not put forward any workable solutions to the status quo,  And they're not in favour of full decrim.  So what do they prefer?  There's the status quo, and then there's full decrim which would make things safer for women than the status quo.  Which do you prefer?  If neither are acceptable, then put forward a solution that would actually make things safer for sex workers.

Is making things safer for those who get paid for sex the only goal here? If so, is full decrim going to accomplish that and, is it the only way to accomplish it? In reading the report from New Zealand, I think it's fair to say that the jury's still out. Also, in terms of the well-being of all women, what are the effects? Far from proposing alternative solutions, I still have questions that haven't been adequately addressed myself.

wage zombie wrote:

Advocates of decrim for sex workers only have been asked multiple times to provide details about how that would work, but details are sparse.  If you can't provide a workable alternative to the status quo, and you have moral objections to proposed workable alternatives to the status quo, then...it will be hard for people not to get confused into thinking you prefer the status quo.

It's perfectly workable to change the law to prevent the arrest of women in prostitution without having to solve the problems for those involved in buying sex from them. They are not one and the same, despite efforts to link them inextricably.

 

G. Muffin

No, Susan, it's not my thoughts that are killing you.  It's men.  Men trained to believe that sex is something you grab, just like you grab a six pack from the liquor store shelf. 

As for your competency quiz:  No, I am not on medication.  Yes, I have been a victim of a crime.

remind remind's picture

continued here

Pages

Topic locked