|
Post by sargassosea on Mar 3, 2010 12:04:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by jemand on Mar 3, 2010 12:32:01 GMT -5
Why is the problem prostitution and not our cruel insistence on sabotaging any true social safety net? Sex workers don't want anyone they loved to have to have sex for pay in order not to starve. Well DUH. But why is the problem the "sex for pay" and not the "society will let you STARVE."
I know very much you despise legal sex work, sea. I just think it's the focus on the absolute wrong end of things. It would be like trying to DENY undocumented immigrants access to work, so they starve, instead of setting up laws mandating safe working conditions, decent pay, safety net for disability or unemployment, etc.
It just seems such a weird approach to me. Currently, some of these women choose between sex work and death. That's awful. Why anyone would see such a situation and say "oh, we should end... SEX WORK!" is beyond me. Lovely, now they have a choice of... 'and death.'
|
|
|
Post by sargassosea on Mar 3, 2010 16:06:04 GMT -5
Jemand – I think that you grossly misunderstand me. And here are the reasons why: 1) “…our cruel insistence…” – I am not a member of *our*, 2) I “despise legal sex work”? What about illegal sex work? Do I despise that too? 3) and death is still a ‘choice’ left to them anyway – that 92+%... It seems that you are really effing pissed that women have so few other viable means of financial support? Guess what? I am 100,000% with you on that one, sister. That’s what I’m doing here – not advocating for a ban on sex work, but advocating for a World that can respect all women as more than a sum of their sex parts. edit/typo
|
|
|
Post by jemand on Mar 3, 2010 16:28:29 GMT -5
a quick note on "our" I was just using it to denote a sort of collective responsibility in that our culture and society is set up that way. Sure, we may try to fight against it, but I think that regardless, we are still *in* that society, so I just used 'our.' Besides, I think even when we try to fight it, we can't help but internalize at least *some* of the messages, so we can't really be completely "out" of society.
Anyway, apparently I have misunderstood you, sorry. You are right that I am super pissed women don't have more options of financial support in the world (though not just women, we tend to treat most poor people like shit). And that of the women who *do* have options and who might be interested in sex work as just one aspect of their natural personalities, often choose not to do it because they are scared (and rightly so). Our societal constructions of "value" draw targets for violence and abuse (even death) all over women who do sex work-- and even sometimes their family members. But still, I see the problem as lying 100% in our messed up society, and not at all on the act itself.
|
|
|
Post by Vyckie D. Garrison on Mar 4, 2010 20:45:59 GMT -5
PMMPrairie Muffins improve their intellect and knowledge as they have opportunity, first by seeking wisdom from God's word, then by reading good books and other materials which help them to make informed opinions about a wide variety of subjects.When I read this ~ I just fumed! What makes me so angry about this is that I honestly believed I *was* making informed decisions. I sought wisdom ~ first from God's word ~ and I also read "good books" (mostly purchased from Vision Forum, American Vision, etc.) ~ and so, when I started corresponding with my highly-educated uncle I could confidently write about how informed I was on "a wide variety of subjects." I now can see clearly how little I actually knew ~ and how much of my bible study was influenced by the "good books and other materials" which systematically narrowed my mind into the confines of the fundamentalist QF worldview until I absolutely could not think outside that little box. No ~ the Prairie Muffin reading materials on which I spent a substantial portion of our household income did not improve my intellect and knowledge. Dammit.
|
|
|
Post by susan on Mar 7, 2010 22:17:28 GMT -5
Jemand -- doesn't it seem skewed that anyone would need to PAY anyone else to have sex with them? I mean, both men and women have sex drives, so it just doesn't seem that big of a stretch that everyone should be able to find someone who'd be happy to have sex with them withOUT getting paid.
And the fact that the people paying for sex are usually men -- doesn't this seem to be an indication of a bizarre and twisted desire to treat women as objects and not as people?
I don't know, but it just seems to me that if we could acheive the caring society that you are advocating for, everyone would be having great sex without needing to pay for it. So, on the one hand, prostitution would be "safer" in such a society ... but on the other hand, it would be nonexistent.
|
|
|
Post by jemand on Mar 7, 2010 23:22:03 GMT -5
susan, Well, sometimes my boyfriend gives me a backrub-- that doesn't mean that I'll never go to a spa and pay a masseuse to do it, as well. Why *wouldn't* anyone ever want to pay for an interaction that included sex? Such as, if it involved a third person and a lot of specialized and expensive equipment, why wouldn't a couple pay someone who has experience with being the third in a threesome to make the other two feel comfortable, and be able to pay for the equipment and their lifestyle with payment for using their experience to help the couple have a good time? You're assuming sex is only good, or at least is best, if it's free. And that isn't true, there are many safe fantasies that can be better filled by a facilitator who can help you not be quite so shy or feel weird about it, and why *shouldn't* those facilitators get paid, any less than people who give professional massages are paid? There is no categorical reason why someone getting free sex with one person wouldn't want to get or give sex for pay with another person. Plus, the statement that everyone should be able to find someone to provide sex for free does not even logically follow. There is no logical reason to believe that the women who "can't get sex for free" would necessarily want to sleep with the men who "can't get sex for free", or vice versa. I think you're assuming they would have sex with each other, because they would be "stuck with" that other group. But they are only "stuck" if you assume free sex is the only valid or good sex. In actual fact they are *not* stuck with that other group for free, because for pay, they can sleep with someone they actually *want* to have sex with.
|
|
|
Post by susan on Mar 8, 2010 18:16:17 GMT -5
Jemand, I honestly wasn't thinking of anyone being stuck with someone they didn't want to have sex with.
I mean, I'm 45 and weigh upwards of 200 lbs -- I don't exactly fit into the model of the desirable woman -- but I don't have to settle for, or be stuck with, anyone I don't want to have sex with.
I love my husband and he loves me, neither of us is a "perfect 10," but neither of us feels "stuck" or as if we are having to settle for someone we don't have to be with.
So, I honestly don't think I'm naive in believing that true love is available to anyone, of any age, and of any appearance. If I weren't married, and wanted to have a sexual relationship without marriage, I have no doubt that even at my size and age and all, I could find a nice man who I was attracted to, who would be happy to have sex with me without me needing to pay him for it.
As far as paying a masseusse -- I guess I do have a mental block that keeps me from being able to perceive sex as a service to be bought and sold. I can't get past my belief that it's best expressed as intimacy between 2 people -- and I can't help thinking that prostitution will always result in someone being demeaned and objectified.
|
|
|
Post by susan on Mar 8, 2010 18:18:44 GMT -5
My other mental block is that I can't imagine enjoying sex with someone who didn't really WANT to have sex with me. No matter how desirable the guy was, if I had to pay him to sleep with me that would just ruin the whole dynamic.
I like being wined and dined and made a big deal of -- being pursued, not being the pursuer.
|
|
|
Post by jemand on Mar 8, 2010 22:11:53 GMT -5
Jemand, I honestly wasn't thinking of anyone being stuck with someone they didn't want to have sex with. I mean, I'm 45 and weigh upwards of 200 lbs -- I don't exactly fit into the model of the desirable woman -- but I don't have to settle for, or be stuck with, anyone I don't want to have sex with. I love my husband and he loves me, neither of us is a "perfect 10," but neither of us feels "stuck" or as if we are having to settle for someone we don't have to be with. So, I honestly don't think I'm naive in believing that true love is available to anyone, of any age, and of any appearance. If I weren't married, and wanted to have a sexual relationship without marriage, I have no doubt that even at my size and age and all, I could find a nice man who I was attracted to, who would be happy to have sex with me without me needing to pay him for it. As far as paying a masseusse -- I guess I do have a mental block that keeps me from being able to perceive sex as a service to be bought and sold. I can't get past my belief that it's best expressed as intimacy between 2 people -- and I can't help thinking that prostitution will always result in someone being demeaned and objectified. ... My other mental block is that I can't imagine enjoying sex with someone who didn't really WANT to have sex with me. No matter how desirable the guy was, if I had to pay him to sleep with me that would just ruin the whole dynamic. I like being wined and dined and made a big deal of -- being pursued, not being the pursuer. But just because you are paying for a service does NOT mean the other person doesn't want to give it. A *lot* of people love their jobs! And, for instance, a lot of doctors and nurses go into the medical field because they *want* to help people. That does NOT mean, that, when they help people they shouldn't be paid for it or because they are paid for it, they don't want to. Paying for sex does not mean the other person doesn't *want* to have sex with you any more than paying to watch a movie means the actors must hate their jobs. And personally, the dichotomy of "sex" and "not sex" for work, and life, and whatever, gets way to close to the generators of other social dichotomies, female/male, etc, and confined roles of acceptability. Such a dichotomy bothers me greatly, personally. I don't think your perspective or mine is *more valid* in a relationship, we will get our separate relationships and we will think about them separately and that's perfectly great. But we were talking about what would exist in a free and open and fair society, and I don't think that people who view it my way *won't exist* in a fully free society, and therefore, I don't think that there won't be anyone who in a free society will think of sex as something that can be extremely multifaceted, and in some instances be quite similar to acting and massage. I don't see why those people couldn't be quite happy doing it for pay-- and just because it was for pay doesn't mean they hate their job! And just to prod oh so slightly, you call it "true love" because that's what *you* want lol. I'm not convinced *everyone* quite values it exactly the same way, and I don't think that has to be a bad thing (for instance, my 'true love' would never include being wined and dined and NOT being the pursuer, etc.) Anyway, I just don't see any logical reason why your two "mental blocks" would be shared by 100% of the population in a "caring society" and so I see no reason why a safe form of sex work couldn't exist. If we want to talk demeaning and objectifying, we can talk sports lol. Seriously though, I personally view sex work as having the possibility to be a quite respected profession, combining elements of many service jobs, acting, massage, some psychology, etc. I don't respect sports nearly as much, but others disagree .
|
|
|
Post by sargassosea on Mar 10, 2010 7:54:14 GMT -5
Vyckie – No kidding with the *I thought I had it nailed!* thing. We have a refrigerator magnet which depicts a Godly Family looking towards the Heavens with this caption: Believe those who seek the truth. Doubt those who find it. Jemand & Susan – I’d like to direct your attention to one of our most eloquent educators on the subject of prostitution - - rmott62.wordpress.com/2010/03/09/breathing-makes-me-want-to-scream/ - - This is just her latest essay – there’s plenty more and I highly recommend any of them. Interested to know what you think
|
|
|
Post by jemand on Mar 10, 2010 8:52:00 GMT -5
Sea, so what you think is, logically, intrinsically to the very basic *idea* of sex and pay, it has to be that way? Sex is totally different than *anything else in human life* and that isn't a function of our societal attitudes, but it is a function of logical necessity?
Is not that magical distinction between sex, and not sex "it's just *different*" from the same place as such damaging OTHER socially constructed false binaries, such as male roles, and female roles, they are "just *different*" and gay marriage shouldn't be allowed because it is magically "different" than straight marriage, and other false binaries such as madonna/whore? There is much abuse in our society. But I believe false binaries are part of the problem. And the idea that sex is intrinsically *so much different* than any other physical service, that sex is *infinitely different* than even selling fantasy in mainstream movies? I don't think that's helpful.
Sex trafficking is real and is a problem, where I have a disagreement, is when people say it is logically intrinsic to the very *idea* of *ever* mixing anything sexual and payment. It doesn't logically follow, there exists abuse in every aspect of human life, sex is not 'special' that way, and sex is not 'special' either that selling it logically requires abuse. We can fight abuse without getting sidetracked by fighting something that is only incidentally connected to it, or only connected through certain social attitudes-- fighting sex work then would be trying to treat the symptom when you have the main disease still eating you out from the inside. It'd be like trying to repaint cracking and melting paint *while the fire's still burning.*
|
|
|
Post by kisekileia on Mar 10, 2010 9:16:43 GMT -5
Jemand, thank you for saying all of this a lot better than I could.
|
|
|
Post by sargassosea on Mar 10, 2010 10:21:07 GMT -5
Jemand –
You sure have a way of knowing what people believe based on very little evidence – in other words I think you are attributing a certain mind-set to me (again) that is nowhere near where I’m coming from.
So, I’ll say straight up what I believe so we don’t have to have any more *speculation* about my feelings concerning *sex*, *money* and *work*.
*Sex is lovely – not special or magical or dirty or anything else.
*Money is unfortunately necessary in most of the worlds man-made economic systems.
*Work is something we must do to get shit done.
It was estimated in 2007 that the Pornstitution industry, both *legal* and *illegal*, would be bringing in 57 billion dollars.
Tell me, Jemand, how many of those dollars do the women end up with? Do you know? Do you know the going rate for double penetration? Girl-on-girl? Mutiple face shots? Fisting - vaginal/anal? Animal? What about the women who are unknowingly being filmed by their boyfriend/husband - how much of that 57 billion are they receiving?
Do you care?
I get the feeling that your privilege is blinding you to the reality of prostituted women, girls, and feminized others. I get the feeling that Liberal/Progressive Dude politics are backing up your Utopian Ideal of the Happy Hooker as part “acting, massage, some psychology, etc.”.
But, this is not Utopia. Women and children are literally being fucked to death all over this planet so that men can have their dominance, orgasms and profits and it seems like you don’t give a flip for them.
Right now. Right this minute – not some far off fantasy land where pornstitution is “having the possibility to be a quite respected profession.”
The sex trade is an immediate Human Rights issue, Jemand.
Please go read rmott62.
|
|
|
Post by jemand on Mar 10, 2010 12:50:49 GMT -5
It was estimated in 2007 that the Pornstitution industry, both *legal* and *illegal*, would be bringing in 57 billion dollars. Tell me, Jemand, how many of those dollars do the women end up with? Tell me what percentage of the garment industry profits a factory worker in bangladesh gets? What about an undocumented immigrant of the food industry profits? What about the ratio between the CEO's yearly bonus and the paper pusher's entire pension in: insurance, banking, energy, etc. How is wanting to fix ALL worker abuse somehow an indication I do not care about workers?!? How is seeing a society WIDE problem evidence I do NOT see some specific example of it?!? I do not agree that this is a specific problem that will always crop up in sex work, and that even if we fix all worker abuses in all industries, *this* industry will remain uniquely intractable and keep devolving back when the others no longer do. I don't believe that at all. It is not the simple idea of trading sex for some other material good that we have to fight, it is the *abuse* in our system that we need to fight. I get the feeling that your privilege is blinding you to the reality of prostituted women, girls, and feminized others. I get the feeling that Liberal/Progressive Dude politics are backing up your Utopian Ideal of the Happy Hooker as part “acting, massage, some psychology, etc.”. But, this is not Utopia. Women and children are literally being fucked to death all over this planet so that men can have their dominance, orgasms and profits and it seems like you don’t give a flip for them. Right now. Right this minute – not some far off fantasy land where pornstitution is “having the possibility to be a quite respected profession.” The sex trade is an immediate Human Rights issue, Jemand. Please go read rmott62. Yeah, I'm a minion of Teh Dudes What percentage of those abused women and children is done in pay-for-sex instances, and and how much is in domestically abusive relationships? If you go back far enough in time, the average abuse in a marriage was probably about the same as suffered by sex workers today. Was the solution to eliminate male-female sexual relationships? NO. And good thing, too, because if that was *necessary* to reduce abuse, if that was *necessary* to increase women's legal right as wives, well, we'd never have gotten *anywhere.* Sex is billions of years old, about as old as multicellular creatures, good luck ending it, and good thing we can reduce abuse in "free" relationships without having to resort to that. Similarly, we can reduce and even eliminate abuse in "pay" relationships as well, without eliminating the entire structure. Which is a good thing, as studies show that trading sexual favors for other material or social goods is perhaps as old as complex society itself, being observed in chimps, macaques, and humans, implying it was also practiced by our latest common ancestor. We *can* end the abuse, but can we end the idea that one person can trade something sexual to another person in exchange for something nonsexual the first person wants? Good luck with that.
|
|
|
Post by Sierra on Mar 10, 2010 13:09:43 GMT -5
I'm with sea in that the reality of our present situation is that prostitution is mostly about the trafficking of poor, usually drugged and kidnapped young women for (a certain kind of) male benefit. In theory, yes, sex has the potential to be treated like any other public service. Is it likely to happen on a societal level in the next thousand years? I think not. One of the facets of sex is that we use it to make families (though I, of all people, will not suggest that procreation is its only purpose!). The public/contracted performance of sex in this alternate reality would still have to coexist with procreation. Both are sex. Therefore I suspect there will always be a level of emotion involved that isn't present in activities like massages.
Sex is a bit different from most other human activities. I suspect it's more like birth/breastfeeding than any other human experience in its potential to form neurochemical bonds between individuals. Sure, casual sex is alive and well - but there is some evidence that sex facilitates pair bonding via the release of oxytocin. (Incontrovertible proof? No. Plausible, especially given repeat sexual encounters with the same partner? I think so.)
One could argue that reproduction itself should be a community activity: that we should abolish the 'family' model altogether. I've never heard of a society actually doing this. Even societies that raise children relatively communally tend to live in extended versions of the nuclear family, revolving around parent-child and sexual-partner relationships. I seem to recall reading that individuals tend to naturally establish social groups of around 100, ranging from acquaintances to partners.
Here is my main question. Is the legalization and promotion of 'sex work' likely to end the enslavement and trafficking of women? I don't think so. I think the illicit sex trade, with all its abuses, will continue to flourish regardless of whether there is a 'surface' model of sex work sanctioned by government - just like there is an illicit gun trade in countries where guns are legal, licensed and registered. I don't see a necessary correlation between legalizing one and more successfully prosecuting the other.
|
|
|
Post by sargassosea on Mar 10, 2010 13:39:58 GMT -5
Let me reiterate, Jemand -
I am not talking about tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow when every person is not oppressed by their work/gov't/partner/parents and all sex workers are licensed massage/therapists and are highly respected - which, by the way, is the Ultimate Goal, right? - I'm talking about right now.
Right now.
Did you follow the link and read what was written there? If so, what did you learn?
Or can you not answer my questions directly?
|
|
|
Post by margybargy on Mar 12, 2010 15:43:00 GMT -5
PMMPrairie Muffins improve their intellect and knowledge as they have opportunity, first by seeking wisdom from God's word, then by reading good books and other materials which help them to make informed opinions about a wide variety of subjects.When I read this ~ I just fumed! What makes me so angry about this is that I honestly believed I *was* making informed decisions. I sought wisdom ~ first from God's word ~ and I also read "good books" (mostly purchased from Vision Forum, American Vision, etc.) ~ and so, when I started corresponding with my highly-educated uncle I could confidently write about how informed I was on "a wide variety of subjects." I now can see clearly how little I actually knew ~ and how much of my bible study was influenced by the "good books and other materials" which systematically narrowed my mind into the confines of the fundamentalist QF worldview until I absolutely could not think outside that little box. No ~ the Prairie Muffin reading materials on which I spent a substantial portion of our household income did not improve my intellect and knowledge. Dammit. Dang. I'm so bummed I missed this post until now. So very true! We human beings are prone to confirmation bias. We tend to seek out information that reinforces what we already believe. We have to actively work to counteract this tendency. I've gotten in the habit of reading stuff that's critical of what I believe even if I don't like it. I think of it as good mental hygiene. Of course, it's got to be quality stuff. Bashing and being bashed are a total waste of time. It also really helps to be aware of logical fallacies. The "false dichotomy" really seems to be used a lot.
|
|
|
Post by susan on Mar 13, 2010 4:04:56 GMT -5
Sea, thank you for the link to "Breathing Makes Me Want to Scream." It reminds me of how different sex is from giving a massage or a counseling session.
As women, when we have sex we're receiving someone into our own bodies. And, no, I don't have any problem with male-male sex or female-female sex.
I'm just saying that sex is extremely intimate.
Jemand, I didn't mean to imply that I thought everyone in a better world would think just like me.
I guess I was just trying to express why *I* could not enjoy having sex with someone if I had to pay them for it. To me, feeling loved and desired is so essential to my enjoyment of sex ...
So I honestly can't comprehend anyone wanting to pay for sex. I feel like there's something missing in their minds, or something. Which is just rather eerie ...
And then -- the fact that so many of these girls and women are being forced into it, regardless of whatever they're telling the johns -- that just makes me see these johns as even more eerie, and even more lacking. That they're willing to participate in such a crime.
It's like they (the johns) are human in appearance but there's nobody really home. And the girls and women are letting, and are mostly forced to let, these empty carcasses into their most intimate selves.
|
|