967: Fundamentally Incompetent

[Killjoy]

Now, on to this...

There are a lot of relationships that are de facto prostitution, with sexual favours being traded quid-pro-quo for household chores or emotional labour or other, different sexual favours... or simply as a prerequisite for remaining in the relationship (or in the house). That's one of the reasons I'm in favour of safe, decriminalized sex work - it'd be hypocritical not to be.

The alternative is to question those relationships and whether they're healthy or not...

Consenting adults, behind closed doors, and all that... but if an intimate relationship isn't founded on basic mutual affection and giving without strings attached... I'm pretty sure it's not a relationship that I understand, or would ever want.

[Tem]

It is only hypocritical to be against prostitution if you approve of relationships that are de facto prostitution. I do not. I am against both.


The fact that some people have to prostitute themselves to have/keep a roof over their heads, is wrong. I do not care whether it is called "sex work" or marriage, or relationship, it is wrong, wrong, wrong. I am in favour of an unconditional basic income, which would put an end to most of this.

[sethtriggs]

That's some sass there, heh heh...

I mean, Ellen's not wrong, but...their communication isn't likely the best. Amusingly so.

[sundriedrainbow]

Re: Jamie's comment and the Rant...

That isn't prostitution it's sexual harassment and/or assault. Quid pro quo is one of the first things you talk about in sexual harassment seminars.

[MitchellTF]

Also? If I recall, this is handled by the law by specifying that prostitution is in exchange for CASH, not other goods. (IE, Jamie's basic thesis is wrong.) And, similarly, exempting it from within marriage. The law can be weird like that. LIke, it's legal to have sex with someone in return for a new car.

It kinda works like this: http://freefall.purrsia.com/ff800/fv00710.htm


That said, the problem is if you define prostitution that generally, you end up having ANY marriage be potentially be definied as prostitution, though there is probably a lack of 'quid-pro-quo'. At the least "I'll do one sex act for you, if you do another" is actually a relatively reasonable thing.


One thing that the law, and moral principles, have to recognize, is 'argumentum ad absurdium'. Namely, when you're taking a law/principle to an absurd premises. (For instance, if the laws against killing, made self defense count as murder). In this case, you have to look at what a prostitute is. Namely, someone who, as a job, trades sexual acts with multiple partners in return for money.

Now, you can argue that certain Gold Diggers are all but prostitutes...but that leads to some other things.

[Keyboard Warrior]

There is a large difference between "I think these actions are bad and/or unhealthy" and "I think these actions should be illegal".

My view of both prostitution-for-money and trading sex for food/shelter/glamorous lifestyle: Some people are perfectly happy as sex workers. I know, it is hard to understand, but People Are Different[tm].
Some people would prefer to do something else but decided that selling sex is, for them, better than the available alternatives. I mean, that's kind of self-evident, isn't it? Removing it as an alternative would only give them the option to do something *less* desirable. Since there is no victim other than the sex worker, the only reason I can find to be against prostitution is if you have the really condescending viewpoint that the sex worker doesn't really understand what they want and that you should decide for them what they *really* feel.

[Tem]

What the law says is irrelevant. If the law declared prostitution to not be prostitution, but "sex work", I would still call it prostitution.

I don't care about the occasional happy hooker. (If we are to assume that she exists) There is no fundamental human right to work in your "dream job". (It is not really work, it is on par with organ selling, but you know that) If outlawing the buying of other people's bodies for masturbation drives the happy hookers out of business, well, too bad. Not my problem. I cannot work in my dream job, either, and I'd rather live in a world where men do not look at me as a for-free version of some commodity they can buy. The needs of all women are more important than the needs of that mythical creature that the happy hooker is.

Obviously, one needs to punish the men who buy women, not the other way round, but everyone knows that.

[Killjoy]

Because prostitution already being illegal has... what... eliminated it?

Or just made the women involved easier for the pimps and johns to victimize?


And if you think that prostitution is the cause of how some men view women... you have the cause-effect relationship backwards. Some men will just be looking for sex, nothing else, and if they have to pay to get it that way, they will.

[sparr]

if an intimate relationship isn't founded on basic mutual affection and giving without strings attached... I'm pretty sure it's not a relationship that I understand, or would ever want.

How is it relevant whether or not you understand it or want it for yourself?

I cannot work in my dream job, either, and I'd rather live in a world where men do not look at me as a for-free version of some commodity they can buy. The needs of all women are more important than the needs of that mythical creature that the happy hooker is.

Please explain to me how you have not just made an argument against all forms of labor-for-money?

Put another way: How is a prostitute selling their body any more than a coal miner is? How are they objectified by johns any more than a coal miner is objectified by a coal mine owner?

[maarvarq]

Obviously (my emphasis), one needs to punish the men who buy women, not the other way round, but everyone knows that.

Yeah sure, "obviously" and "everyone knows that" . How about we obviously don't punish anyone for trying to fulfill what is for most people a fundamental human need (I know you don't think that, but it isn't any less true on that account), but try to figure out if there is some approximation to the best outcome for everyone?