Sex workers?

[Mock Turtle]

Would that make it OK, then?

No, exploitation is mostly always bad, and it certainly isn't just sex-workers who might experience such.

Our culture has essentially weaponized money now that almost none of us can survive without it. Those who have more of it than they need now have power over the lives and well-being of those who don't have enough. And they are using that power to exploit them for even more wealth for themselves. And yet for some reason, idiots that we are, we are letting them do it. And we are even doing it to each other every chance we get. Because they have somehow convinced us that this is just the way it has to be. That this is how we humans must live: using and abusing and exploiting each other's weaknesses for the money to get what we need to survive. And after that, of course, to get whatever we want.

Is there any point at which we finally say "enough is enough"? Do they even get to buy the right to sexually assault us? And have we been so totally demoralized that we will agree to let them do it?

Whatever the argument as to exploitation, and as to trying to eliminate such, the issue of sex-work in my view just boils down to the issue of informed and legal consent, such that why should others think they have the right to make this illegal simply because they have certain beliefs - as to what sex and/or sexual behaviour should be?

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Is it amoral to see a sex worker? I think it's amoral to pick up sex workers who work on the streets and the trucker stops**mod edit** But if you go to an escort business where they don't hire underage people, they are on the up and up is that ok?

How do we know they have not been kidnapped? **mod edit**

I think it depends on the circumstances and the person. I used to be totally against it until I learnt that not everyone experiences intimacy during sex and sex for some people is as casual as drinking water and it’s just a performance. it doesn’t mean the same thing to them as it does to most other people; they don’t have the same emotions attached to it and therefore they are able to cope with it being purely transactional. I would conclude that most people are not suited for prostitution but there are a minority of people who can deal with it

 

[PureX]

No, exploitation is mostly always bad, and it certainly isn't just sex-workers who might experience such.

But the obvious and degrading degree of exploitation is far more extreme with prostitutes. It's why everyone here is trying to equate it with less extreme "jobs" to try and ignore and mitigate that fact.

Whatever the argument as to exploitation, and as to trying to eliminate such, the issue of sex-work in my view just boils down to the issue of informed and legal consent,

That's too bad. Because what it really boils down to is our inability to recognize that we are sanctioning an extreme example of exploitation instead of recognizing it for what it is, and saying that we draw the line at sexual assault. Freedom does not mean that we are free to do whatever we want to each other so long as we are willing to pay them money for their cooperation.

 

[PureX]

I think it depends on the circumstances and the person. I used to be totally against it until I learnt that not everyone experiences intimacy during sex and sex for some people is as casual as drinking water and it’s just a performance. it doesn’t mean the same thing to them as it does to most other people; they don’t have the same emotions attached to it and therefore they are able to cope with it being purely transactional. I would conclude that most people are not suited for prostitution but there are a minority of people who can deal with it

Humans can deal with a lot of things. That doesn't mean it's good for society to sanction those things for money. Humans can live on one kidney, but that doesn't mean it's good for society to allow people to buy and sell their kidneys for money.

 

[Mock Turtle]

But the obvious and degrading degree of exploitation is far more extreme with prostitutes. It's why everyone here is trying to equate it with less extreme "jobs" to try and ignore and mitigate that fact.

That's too bad. Because what it really boils down to is our inability to recognize that we are sanctioning an extreme example of exploitation instead of recognizing it for what it is, and saying that we draw the line at sexual assault. Freedom does not mean that we are free to do whatever we want to each other so long as we are willing to pay them money for their cooperation.

Whatever, you are still crossing the line of self-determination as to freedom of choice (you telling others how to behave), especially when such transactions will be entirely legal in some countries. And you wouldn't want to go the slippery slope route now would you?

Might look at Afghanistan for one example.

 

[Wherenextcolumbus]

Humans can deal with a lot of things. That doesn't mean it's good for society to sanction those things for money. Humans can live on one kidney, but that doesn't mean it's good for society to allow people to buy and sell their kidneys for money.

I was more so referring to individuals rather than whether it’s something that should be promoted in mainstream society. I don’t see all sex workers as victims like what I once did because I realised I was projecting my perspective of sex onto every single person & not every single person is affected by sex the same way. For a minority of people, there is no intimacy/attachment or positive emotions they associate with sex - it’s just a means to get what they want, whether that is attention, money or both and for some it’s a tool of power & control. It’s possible for someone like this to not be negatively affected by sex being transactional rather than something based on attraction, affection, love, bonding, trust, intimacy etc

 

[Alien826]

Younger people, especially Gen Z men, tend to be more conservative. What you're saying here is the last vestiges of the 1960s free for all mentality. RF does not represent the majority of a society. I'm quite sure the majority of your own generation doesn't agree with you, either. Times change in the other direction, too, especially when going so far in a certain direction has produced a morally bankrupt society. But prostitution still isn't legal in most areas, anyway. I don't know why people in this thread are acting like it is. Unless you're in Vegas or Amsterdam, it's an illegal activity. So I guess I'm not too far from the thinkkng of most people like you are trying to portray to discourage me. Sorry but you're not the future. I still am (well, as long as I don't give in and kill myself).

Yes, the 1960s were a bit extreme! But I see that as a reaction to the oppression that preceded it.

There does seem to be a swing back the other way at the moment, but that happens. Look at the whole period. Homosexuality has gone from being illegal, with people being imprisoned for it, to being pretty much accepted by the general population and now they can marry. The freedom of women to to engage in professions previously reserved for men and to be paid the same has progressed, though there is a way to go. All kinds of religiously inspired "blue" laws have faded away. Did you know that oral sex was illegal in some states at one time? Such laws still exist in some states, but were ruled to be unconstitutional by SCOTUS in 2003. Contraception was established as a right by SCOTUS for married people in 1965 and expanded to single people in 1972. I was shocked to learn recently that was not the case up to such a recent date.

Oh, and if you do decide to kill yourself, that's legal now, it used to be a crime.

I'm not trying to discourage you. Just disagreeing, I hope politely. If it comes over otherwise, my apologies.

Because being told that your views are outdated and the world has moved on is just a totally neutral comment to make. (I do think a person old enough to be my grandfather telling me this is hilariously ironic, but I digress.) I don't care if you see it or not.

In case you meant me as well, I'll respond.

Well, young whipper-snapper, you need to have respect for your elders! More seriously, I'm surprised you are that young, you present as older. If we are talking about the changes over the last half of the 1900s and onward, maybe we have a bit more perspective? We were actually there, right?

 

[Balthazzar]

I've read that prostitution is the oldest and longest standing profession on this earth. Is it immoral? I guess that depends on how it is done and who you are. Human trafficking would be something criminal and although prostitution is illegal in most areas, it isn't a criminal practice. Sex workers aren't anything uncommon. Many people frown on the practice while others understand it as a profession. Human trafficking is a very different thing. Forced sex labor would be criminal and is and will likely always be.

 

[PureX]

Whatever, you are still crossing the line of self-determination as to freedom of choice (you telling others how to behave), especially when such transactions will be entirely legal in some countries.

Our "freedom" is not sacrosanct. It is limited by many things, not the least of which is the safety and well being of the collective within which we humans all live. We are all vulnerable in certain ways, and there will always be those among us who wish to use that vulnerability against is. To exploit and abuse us. Which is why consent is not some magical excuse. And neither is paying money for it. Humans don't suddenly want to have sexual intercourse with someone that they did not want to have sexual intercourse with just because they were handed some money. So this claim of "mutual consent" is bogus. We can't buy anyone's consent. It's impossible. All we're really doing is buying their complicity in their own sexual assault. Which is why this kind of thing is so grossly humiliating and demoralizing.

Are you aware that a huge majority of prostitutes were sexually abused as children? And that in their minds, making their abusers "pay for it" is a way of creating the illusion that they are taking back their power? And it is an illusion, of course, because all they're really doing is SELLING their power; their right to say NO. But they grew up in a world where saying "no" was meaningless, and useless. So now they think making their tormentors pay for a "yes" is the best they can get. That's how damaged they already are from being sexually used and abused. So damaged that they will sell their right not to be abused, to their abusers.

Calling this "freedom" is just sick and foolish nonsense. And calling all this mutual abuse and exploitation "mutual consent" is, too.

 

[Mock Turtle]

Our "freedom" is not sacrosanct. It is limited by many things, not the least of which is the safety and well being of the collective within which we humans all live. We are all vulnerable in certain ways, and there will always be those among us who wish to use that vulnerability against is. To exploit and abuse us. Which is why consent is not some magical excuse. And neither is paying money for it. Humans don't suddenly want to have sexual intercourse with someone that they did not want to have sexual intercourse with just because they were handed some money. So this claim of "mutual consent" is bogus. We can't buy anyone's consent. It's impossible. All we're really doing is buying their complicity in their own sexual assault. Which is why this kind of thing is so grossly humiliating and demoralizing.

Your view, but not the views of all those who make such transactions. You are still just dictating, simply because you have certain beliefs as to what sex and sexuality actually are or should be.

Are you aware that a huge majority of prostitutes were sexually abused as children?

Any evidence as to this? I'm sure many are, and I loathe those who exploit children so as to be in such situations - with poverty usually being why any carer would allow children to become involved in sex-work, or abuse as it should be called.

And that in their minds, making their abusers "pay for it" is a way of creating the illusion that they are taking back their power? And it is an illusion, of course, because all they're really doing is SELLING their power; their right to say NO. But they grew up in a world where saying "no" was meaningless, and useless. So now they think making their tormentors pay for a "yes" is the best they can get. That's how damaged they already are from being sexually used and abused. So damaged that they will sell their right not to be abused, to their abusers.

Calling this "freedom" is just sick and foolish nonsense. And calling all this mutual abuse and exploitation "mutual consent" is, too.

Rubbish. Nothing to do with power, but more to do with actual freedom (of choice) - as to doing what others might not like but which would be legal.

Not found anything else you hate and you want banned?

 

[PureX]

Your view, but not the views of all those who make such transactions.

You still seem to think that their view is sacrosanct. It's not.

You are still just dictating, ...

Yes. The well being of our human collective is more important than these kinds of mutually harmful transactions. The well being of those involved still needs to be protected even when those involved cannot recognize that need, themselves. Perhaps especially so in that circumstance.

... simply because you have certain beliefs as to what sex and sexuality actually are or should be.

It's an opinion based on logic and evodence, and not on some blind worship of "individual freedom".

Any evidence as to this?

I'm not your personal librarian. Go look it up, yourself. It's a common statistic.

I'm sure many are, and I loathe those who exploit children so as to be in such situations - with poverty usually being why any carer would allow children to become involved in sex-work, or abuse as it should be called.

Yet you're fine with seeing them exploited further as adults.

 

[Mock Turtle]

You still seem to think that their view is sacrosanct. It's not.

Neither is yours.

Yes. The well being of our human collective is more important than these kinds of mutually harmful transactions. The well being of those involved still needs to be protected even when those involved cannot recognize that need, themselves. Perhaps especially so in that circumstance.

As I stated earlier, I would try to do as much as I could to dissuade any from going into this type of work, and to control it as much as possible - even raising the minimum age perhaps, but there will still be some who fall outside of all this and do want to do sex-work - for whatever reasons. It's not my job to stop them.

It's an opinion based on logic and evodence, and not on some blind worship of "individual freedom".

But you views are simply based on the possible harms?

I'm not your personal librarian. Go look it up, yourself. It's a common statistic.

I've seen relatively small sample sizes as to such.

Yet you're fine with seeing them exploited further as adults.

As I pointed out earlier - if any are drawn to such because of previous abuse then no, I wouldn't want them to do so.

 

[Balthazzar]

Our "freedom" is not sacrosanct. It is limited by many things, not the least of which is the safety and well being of the collective within which we humans all live. We are all vulnerable in certain ways, and there will always be those among us who wish to use that vulnerability against is. To exploit and abuse us. Which is why consent is not some magical excuse. And neither is paying money for it. Humans don't suddenly want to have sexual intercourse with someone that they did not want to have sexual intercourse with just because they were handed some money. So this claim of "mutual consent" is bogus. We can't buy anyone's consent. It's impossible. All we're really doing is buying their complicity in their own sexual assault. Which is why this kind of thing is so grossly humiliating and demoralizing.

Are you aware that a huge majority of prostitutes were sexually abused as children? And that in their minds, making their abusers "pay for it" is a way of creating the illusion that they are taking back their power? And it is an illusion, of course, because all they're really doing is SELLING their power; their right to say NO. But they grew up in a world where saying "no" was meaningless, and useless. So now they think making their tormentors pay for a "yes" is the best they can get. That's how damaged they already are from being sexually used and abused. So damaged that they will sell their right not to be abused, to their abusers.

Calling this "freedom" is just sick and foolish nonsense. And calling all this mutual abuse and exploitation "mutual consent" is, too.

I happen to agree with most of what you stated. The catch would be in the wanting to or not and it being a gainful exchange. I would consider anything less than wanting to a type of forced convoluted sense of obligation to oblige, which would derive from many things, as you stated. Otherwise, it's quite common and accepted and has been for thousands upon thousands of years. I think it can damage a sense of hope for a long lasting and more personal relationship, but this doesn't mean it's impossible. I've noticed how some people treat woman who have been or who still engage in this industry, and it typically doesn't equate to very respectful social interactions. I'm sure the same is true for men, also.

Most who have been subject to the mistreatment are jaded, or so I observe. I could be wrong, but I doubt it. Mutual consent can go both ways, bull**** on one hand and legit on the other. It's not always a bad thing, but it has proven for many, difficult to satisfy a want, and I'm guessing based on quality and character of those who associate.

 

[servant1]

Satan is your bogyman, not mine. I've visited the gate of hell at Solfatara, knocked, there was no one home.

Anyway, In your view I'm wicked, thanks friend. I'll remember that.
It seems that jesus followers amount to about 1/3 of the population, true jesus followers much less than that.
What's it like being in a minority?

Jesus said-FEW will find the road that leads off into life.= not 1/3

 

[ChristineM]

Jesus said-FEW will find the road that leads off into life.= not 1/3

I don't really care what you believe JC said 2000 years ago, and compiled into a book close on 400 years after his death. I have my own view on jesus based on Roman history, not an anonymous book

 

[libre]

I don't view sex work as moral or ethical. People use their free will to do all sorts of things that aren't good.

I'm interested to hear how you reconcile this position with your own pornography consumption that you've discussed here over the years.

 

[PureX]

I happen to agree with most of what you stated. The catch would be in the wanting to or not and it being a gainful exchange. I would consider anything less than wanting to a type of forced convoluted sense of obligation to oblige, which would derive from many things, as you stated. Otherwise, it's quite common and accepted and has been for thousands upon thousands of years. I think it can damage a sense of hope for a long lasting and more personal relationship, but this doesn't mean it's impossible. I've noticed how some people treat woman who have been or who still engage in this industry, and it typically doesn't equate to very respectful social interactions. I'm sure the same is true for men, also.

When a person does not respect themselves enough that they are willing to sell off their right to engage in sexual activity when THEY want to and WITH WHOM they want to, for money, this tends not to inspire much in the way of respect for them from others. After all, if one does not respect themselves, why would others respect them?

However, I feel that the vast majority of men and women that do this sort of thing are psychologically damaged in such a way that they cannot see that they are harming themselves, further. Or can no longer care. Which is why they need the rest of their human collective to look out for them, and to stop the abuse on their behalf.

Most who have been subject to the mistreatment are jaded, or so I observe. I could be wrong, but I doubt it. Mutual consent can go both ways, bull**** on one hand and legit on the other. It's not always a bad thing, but it has proven for many, difficult to satisfy a want, and I'm guessing based on quality and character of those who associate.

Because we live in a capitalist consumer culture. we have been taught from birth that our "wants" are our highest priority and that if we have the money, they should ALWAYS be satisfied. After all, fulfilling our "wants" for fun and profit is what makes the whole world go 'round! Right? It's what we all live for under the capitalist consumption mantra. So if we're old, fat, and ugly and no one wants to have sex with us, BUT we have some money ... PROBLEM SOLVED! That's capitalism, baby! And this idea is so deeply ingrained in our psyche that we can't even see how damaging and demoralizing that is for everyone involved.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Are you sexually assaulting them while they are cleaning your house?

And that is a strawman argument where you assume that paid sex is sexual assault. It can be. Especially if the provider has a pimp. But many independents pick and choose clients. They can simply say "no" if a person does not meet their standards. That is one of the reasons that man prostitutes advocate for decriminalization. If prostitution was decriminalized then force sex would be easily reported rape.

 

[Subduction Zone]

But the obvious and degrading degree of exploitation is far more extreme with prostitutes. It's why everyone here is trying to equate it with less extreme "jobs" to try and ignore and mitigate that fact.

It is only "degrading" if it is against the will of the provider. You appear to be rather prudish when it comes to sex. Some women are like men, they like sex. A lot. It is all a matter of who is in control.

That's too bad. Because what it really boils down to is our inability to recognize that we are sanctioning an extreme example of exploitation instead of recognizing it for what it is, and saying that we draw the line at sexual assault. Freedom does not mean that we are free to do whatever we want to each other so long as we are willing to pay them money for their cooperation.

And one more time, it can be exploitation. That does not mean that it always is. That is why the porn business has exploded in many ways. There are countless women that earn money through such venues as Onlyfans and others where they are in charge. This will probably need to be repeated to you many times, it is not degrading if the woman is in control of who she has sex with.

 

[Balthazzar]

When a person does not respect themselves enough that they are willing to sell off their right to engage in sexual activity when THEY want to and WITH WHOM they want to, for money, this tends not to inspire much in the way of respect for them from others. After all, if one does not respect themselves, why would others respect them?

However, I feel that the vast majority of men and women that do this sort of thing are psychologically damaged in such a way that they cannot see that they are harming themselves, further. Or can no longer care. Which is why they need the rest of their human collective to look out for them, and to stop the abuse on their behalf.

Because we live in a capitalist consumer culture. we have been taught from birth that our "wants" are our highest priority and that if we have the money, they should ALWAYS be satisfied. After all, fulfilling our "wants" for fun and profit is what makes the whole world go 'round! Right? It's what we all live for under the capitalist consumption mantra. So if we're old, fat, and ugly and no one wants to have sex with us, BUT we have some money ... PROBLEM SOLVED! That's capitalism, baby! And this idea is so deeply ingrained in our psyche that we can't even see how damaging and demoralizing that is for everyone involved.

Everyone views it differently and we are entitled to a personal opinion. I've never engaged this way, but lots of people do. It's also, as I stated, the oldest and longest standing profession on earth and it came long before capitalism was there to blame. People tend to enjoy sex. Also, I made mention of the other aspects of the profession that are downright ugly and dangerous, which I do take issue with. I prefer to meet people not involved in the business to mingle with. I still couldn't hold the profession against anyone, unless it became an issue in a personal relationship. This tends to **** people like me off.