Sex Worker Health Issues In The Time of Covid-19

Well, I thought that since, with abortion and prostitution, it's the doctor and the prostitute who are each getting paid in the respective situations, that was your intended comparison, ie. let's compare the recepients of the economic benefit, and if one(the doctor) isn't regarded as exploited, the other(ie. the sex worker) shouldn't be either. As you wrote:

where a doctor or medical professional also receives some type of financial compensation.

But, if I understand your last post correctly, you want to compare men who pay for sex with women who pay for abortions?

CanadaFan wrote:

I guess yes, in a Nordic model Bill C-36 way of viewing things. 

I have to add a cavaet that many but by no means all sex workers don't see themselves as exploited and in fact are basically providing similar "health" related services as doctors, therapists, etc. which of course makes this discussion even more complex.

 

 

 

Well, I don't think men who pay for sex are being exploited in any meaningful way, even under the Nordic model.

I think the logic of pro-choice is that laws against abortion restrict what a woman can do with her own body, and should therefore be abolished.

In regards to sex-work, both of the feminist sides in the debate are saying that, under criminalization, women are somehow having their autonomy violated, albeit in different ways...

-the pro-legalization camp say that women are being prevented from earning a living with their bodies in a manner of their choosing.

-OTOH the abolition camp says that sex-workers are women who have been economically coerced into doing work that they would otherwise not choose to do.

Neither of the "vicitms"(as defined by the respective camps) in these two scenarios is really comparable to men who pay for sex, since those men are not a) being sent to prison for trying to earn a living, or b) experiencing economic pressure that compels them to pay for sex.

At most(in terms of being sympathetic victims) men who pay for sex are comparable to people who used to smoke weed back before legalization: maybe the laws WERE an unfair restriction on their freedom, but it was still possible for them NOT to continue on that course of action without suffering major material harm and/or loss of freedom.

voice of the damned wrote:

CanadaFan wrote:

I guess yes, in a Nordic model Bill C-36 way of viewing things. 

I have to add a cavaet that many but by no means all sex workers don't see themselves as exploited and in fact are basically providing similar "health" related services as doctors, therapists, etc. which of course makes this discussion even more complex.

 

 

 

Well, I don't think men who pay for sex are being exploited in any meaningful way, even under the Nordic model.

I think the logic of pro-choice is that laws against abortion restrict what a woman can do with her own body, and should therefore be abolished.

In regards to sex-work, both of the feminist sides in the debate are saying that, under criminalization, women are somehow having their autonomy violated, albeit in different ways...

-the pro-legalization camp say that women are being prevented from earning a living with their bodies in a manner of their choosing.

-OTOH the abolition camp says that sex-workers are women who have been economically coerced into doing work that they would otherwise not choose to do.

Neither of the "vicitms"(as defined by the respective camps) in these two scenarios is really comparable to men who pay for sex, since those men are not a) being sent to prison for trying to earn a living, or b) experiencing economic pressure that compels them to pay for sex.

At most(in terms of being sympathetic victims) men who pay for sex are comparable to people who used to smoke weed back before legalization: maybe the laws WERE an unfair restriction on their freedom, but it was still possible for them NOT to continue on that course of action without suffering major material harm and/or loss of freedom.

hello bablers.... for the sake of clarity...we do not want "legalization" nor are we "pro-legaliztion". it's decriminalization.

and both "sides" do not identify sex workers as "victims" quite the opposite...in fact i would say that is the fundamental difference between the sex workers rights movement and the abolish sex work movement...we believe sex workers and allow them to define for themselves what they experience.... and being a "victim" is way down the list...

terms like fierce, survivor, strong, warrior, mother, father.... these better describe the sex work experience from a sex worker perspective... "victim" is how the abolitionists strip us of our voice.

HI Bacchus!! hope all is well with you and yours during this crazy time!

Most medical personnel performing terminations aren't beaten up by their clients or their pimps.

Nuff said. Otherwise I don't post in this forum; I post in the feminist one; and really am not going to waste my time on this.  Happy Earth Day to all; I was at the demos at the first one, and of course the huge one here in 2012.

Oh, I thought it was the sex work forum. If it is the feminist forum, of course I can have my say, having been a feminist for over 50 years, but I really won't bother.

Today is Earth Day and a climate denier who is also a "pro-lifer" showed up at the David Suzuki blog. I did make some class-based criticism of Dr Suzuki's downplaying of the differential impact on the basis of social class and income (though Dr Suzuki did mention the contribution made by undervalued workers) but also skewered the climate denier (and petroleum fan) who is also a women-hating "pro-lifer". We need ecosocialism and to build an ecosocialist (and ecofeminist) movement.

Abortion is a medical procedure that is not up for debate on its necessity. It is a necessary medical procedure. Prostitution is a non-essential luxury for mainly men and should not even be considered and presented a comparison, especially in the feminist forum.

I'm not going to argue with Ms Davis as it is pointless; we will never agree. What I find most useful in this thread is to raise the issue of many socially-harmful industries, starting with military production and the over-production of polluting, congestion-causing and dangerous individual motor vehicles. As we have seen recently with the wanton killing of farm animals from chicks to cattle, capitalist agriculture is another biggie.

Indeed, people working in polluting or socially-harmful parts of the economy should not shoulder the burden; we need traditional mesures and retraining with a stipend adequate for them to live on during this process.

We should not do things like re-start asbestos mining for people in that field to have work; there are many, many other things to be done in an ecosocialist and ecofeminist society. Car workers in Oshawa had many ideas on how to repurpose that closed plant.

Yes, it is odd. I don't want any human being, certainly including people in sex work (I'm not speaking of pimps or gangs trafficking people) to be in economic or social distress and not have the resources for a decent life - even without income from those trades. Yes, I think the majority of prostitution or so-called sex work is exploitation, but since when to socialists want exploited people to suffer?  We can do better for people, in particular for racialised or Indigenous people, and particularly vulnerable people such as young LGBTQ people who have had to flee or run away from their homes.

..nice quote!

Ken Burch wrote:

This will be my only post in this discussion, and I'm just posting to ask that the thread title be changed, as it currently looks-whatever the intent of the person who wrote it-as though it were written to cause a particularly inflammatory argument and to lead to accusations of double standards and hypocrisy being flung from at least two different directions.

When I first saw the thread title I thought it represented a bizarre false comparison, but there has been some good discussion. The discussion has changed to the precarious nature of sex work during the pandemic, which is fine also. Threads often drift away from the original intent so there are two choices: change the thread title to reflect the change in direction or ask that someone open a new thread. Up to you. I have no particular preference.

It's been changed.

..came across this a few minutes ago.

SWWAC Covid-19 Relief Fund

This fund was created by Sex Workers of Winnipeg Action Coalition (SWWAC) to assist sex workers who have been impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic. SWWAC's members include sex workers, health care professionals, academics, and allies who are all committed to promoting the human rights, labour rights, and safety of sex workers in Winnipeg.

After the arrival of Covid-19 in Manitoba, many sex workers lost their income overnight and do not qualify for government assistance. When faced with homelessness or not being able to put food on the table, sex workers may see no other option than to continue working despite the risks of not practicing social distancing. We want to help ensure that no sex worker in Winnipeg has to choose between risking exposure to Covid-19 or being able to pay their bills.

This relief fund will be providing monetary aid to sex workers in the Winnipeg area who have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. We are asking for donations and help from allies, clients, organizations, and workers not impacted by the pandemic so that we can take care of our community during this uncertain time.

quote:

Who will be prioritized for receiving funds?

The Sex Workers of Winnipeg Action Coalition (SWWAC) Covid-19 Relief Fund was created for Winnipeg area sex workers who have lost income due to Covid-19 and are struggling. We are prioritizing Indigenous, Black, Trans, and Queer sex workers, migrants and those with precarious status, as well as sex workers living with illness, disability, or in unstable housing situations.

As a fund created by a Manitoba based sex workers rights organization, we recognize the challenges many across our industry face in the midst of social distancing guidelines including workplace closures, loss of clients, and an inability to access emergency resources established by the government.