There is literally nothing wrong with sex as transaction. It probably is unironically as old as humanity itself. And, controversial opinion, it is probably a lot more common today than we think, whether in relationships, or outside them, but I do, it is worth mentioning, have a cynic bias.
Why do I care? Let me put it this way. I am autistically pedantic. But also, I believe in earnest the whole moralizing prostitution thing is really a mask for gender narratives. "Women are helpless muffins". I find this appalling for two reasons: the first, because it is deeply chauvinist when you turn on your brain, the second, because some men might be naive enough to fall for it and get taken advantage of by women as a result.
No matter how the moralizers try to frame it as being about whether sex can be "work" or not, in reality, the activity itself, and its semantics, are irrelevant in terms of human suffering.
The actual causes of suffering:
1. Pimps (who I consider on the same level as slavers, and would treat the same as the good ol' John Brown did if I could)
2. Cops (being branded a criminal isn't very nice)
3. Violent Johns (but independent prostitutes nowadays have online platforms where they gossip about and warn of clients to other prostitutes)
4. STDs (admittedly still a risk even with medical advancement)
That's it.
Any discussion that does not revolve around these is useless moralizing.
Prostitution encourages human trafficking, the formation of criminal gangs, and increased strain on health services from all the sexual diseases being passed around. Therefore prostitution is illegal under all socialist states.
>>2518520>Prostitution leadsYou're still thinking like a moralizer. You can't abolish sex as transaction. North Korea has it.
We need to abolish bourgeois prostitution and establish socialist prostitution and I say this without a centimeter of sarcasm.
In socialism, prostitutes will trade sex for personal favors instead of commodities.
but you are just moralizing in the opposite direction:
>its wrong to criticize prostitution
etc.
>>2518520That seems more like consequence of illegality than a cause.
>>2518511Prostitution/marriage is a remnant of feudal/semi-feudal labor relations. Consequently, the John/husband can alienate the prostitute/wife of her labor without being a capitalist. Industrial prostitution/marriage such as through pornography or escort services and websites like Craiglist and Grindr redirects profits to the capitalist who owns the means of production.
Currently, we do not have the techno-social relations available for a reasonable and non-alienating form of sex-work. For a start, we need denser cities and less homeowners.
>prostitution le good because I need sex because I'm an unloveable incel chud
>>2518511>Moralizing OP screeching about moralismthis faggotry was better when you kept it to /ISG/
A lot of people on these kinds of communities are very sheltered suburban dorks who are still full of their parents Judeo-Christian morals and values about sex, they are scared of sex because its been built up in their minds as this terrible moral dilemma. They've never had casual sex with friends or been in an environment where people are having casual sex, etc. They view women as holy vessels who must be pure and untainted.
>>2518535>That seems more like consequence of illegality than a cause.Lol. Okay. Now tell me about how none of this stuff happens in Germany?
>>2518621>you wre a weirdo if ur against prostitutionuhh.
>>2518624Have you ever even seen a prostitute in real life?
>>2518625yes; she was homeless.
>>2518626Now I know you're lying. Only male prostitutes are ever homeless, female prostitutes get paid.
>>2518627>get paidyeah - how much do think this crack whore was offering, exactly?
retard.
>>2518627NTA anon, but I've definitely met female prostitutes. Even some kind of attractive ones. Really if you see a woman on the street, you can probably just assume she prostitutes herself unless she's just a full on schizo or something. One of these woman I remember her saying in kinda jokingly in exasperation "all I got to sell is this pussy!" or something like that.
>>2518627>Now I know you're lying. Only male prostitutes are ever homeless, female prostitutes get paid.This is an 18+ website. please fuck off.
The vast majority of sex workers do it out of desperation, same reason why vast majority of workers get a job. Why are there millions of factory workers, farm laborers, janitors, cashiers etc? Not because they enjoy being one, but because they must do it to survive.
So we are against sex work for the same reason as we are against the concept of WAGE LABOR. And sex work is quite degrading to the woman.
Now just one caveat, it is indeed true that some women make huge amounts of money doing sex work. But that is not a reason to support sex work. There won't be athletes being paid 10000x what the average worker is paid under socialism, and there won't be sex workers making millions as well.
>>2518750> And sex work is quite degrading to the woman.More importantly it's simply more damaging to it's workers.
Pro-sex work people are desperate to shove agency on to the most marginalised in our society only because it's cheaper than actually having to fix the material reasons people are pushed in to sex work.
>we can get rid of the oldest profession under socialism because… we just CAN, OKAY?
Might as well declare weed illegal.
Kill sex kulaks. Behead sex kulaks. Roundhouse kick sex kulaks into the concrete. Slam dunk sex kulaks into the trashcan. Crucify filthy sex kulaks. Defecate in sex kulaks food. Launch sex kulaks into the sun. Stir fry sex kulaks in a wok. Toss sex kulaks into active volcanoes. Urinate into a sex kulaks gas tank. Judo throw sex kulaks into a wood chipper. Twist sex kulaks heads off. Report sex kulaks to the IRS. Karate chop sex kulaks in half. Curb stomp pregnant sex kulaks. Trap sex kulaks in quicksand. Crush sex kulaks in the trash compactor. Liquefy sex kulaks in a vat of acid. Eat sex kulaks. Dissect sex kulaks. Exterminate sex kulaks in the gas chamber. Stomp sex kulaks skulls with steel toed boots. Cremate sex kulaks in the oven. Lobotomize sex kulaks. Mandatory abortions for sex kulaks. Grind sex kulaks fetuses in the garbage disposal. Drown sex kulaks in fried chicken grease. Vaporize sex kulaks with a ray gun. Kick old sex kulaks down the stairs. Feed sex kulaks to alligators. Slice sex kulaks with a katana.
>>2518768Sex work effectively already doesn't exist in multiple countries on the planet.
>>2518750>The vast majority of sex workers do it out of desperationThat's a bit of a stretch. Sex work is a rather broad industry in the modern world, you have everything from crack whores sucking dick under bridges for $10 to middle class yoga moms starting OnlyFans accounts to make some extra money to famous content creators who earn like $30 million a year.
>>2518511I don't get how the assumption of a defining quality to exist in an action for it to be bad, undesirable etc. is moralism while the same assumption for it to be good, acceptable etc. is not moralism.
>"Prostitution is wrong because…" <"Thinking prostitution is wrong is wrong because…" The materialist line on prostitutes is that they are socio-economical parasites. Their parasitism is illegal in Communism
>>2518810>>2518810>That's a bit of a stretch. Sex work is a rather broad industry in the modern world, you have everything from crack whores sucking dick under bridges for $10 to middle class yoga moms starting OnlyFans accounts to make some extra money to famous content creators who earn like $30 million a year.Yes you have discovered why 'Sex Work' is a useless term invented only to obfuscate. Every 'pro sex work' person will always move their goal posts to talking about fucking Only Fans or Porn because it's the only way their opinions can not sound sociopathic on the face.
>>2518842Seems like you're the one moving the goalposts now.
>>2518810Ok and? Wage labor is pretty broad as well. It doesn't matter. We are against the concept of selling labor for money.
>>2518810If you're doing it because you need money, and would not do it otherwise if you had money, you're being economically coerced. No one would get up at 5am every day to go work at a shitty diner unless they had a landlord knocking on their door every month and bills to pay.
We already have a word for being coerced into sexual acts, and it's not "sex work"
The OF models that make millions are a fraction of a fraction, and more importantly, don't do it out of economic coercion. They're not wage labourers though - they're CELEBRITIES. Not relevant to this discussion. As for the yoga mom, if she's starting an OF because she needs some extra money, and would otherwise not do it without financial pressure (i.e. like the vast majority of OF 'creators'), then read:
< We already have a word for being coerced into sexual acts, and it's not "sex work" >>2518870>If you're doing it because you need money, and would not do it otherwise if you had money, you're being economically coercedMost people work shitty jobs they don't like because they have to do whatever they can do to make enough money, most workers of every kind are coerced into doing whatever it is they do.
Many sex workers, probably most of them nowadays, are just people doing it partially for their own enjoyment and partially as a side hustle and it's not something they even do for a living, never mind are being compelled or coerced into doing. In fact, our society compels and coerces women to *not* do things like sex work and to instead get respectable straight jobs where they work for a boss or become housewives.
Sex work has become a lot less coercive as an industry in recent years since the era of internet and digital cameras and the democratization of the means of production as well as evolving social attitudes about sexuality. It was worse in the old days when the sex work industry was entirely a clandestine black market business that was shunned and swept under the rug by conservative Christian mainstream society, sex workers were more likely to be exploited by gross sleazy pimps and porn directors feeding them drugs and abusing them and all the rest of it, etc.
Our society has already tried your method of slut shaming and burying our heads in the sand for centuries as a reaction to the phenomenon of sex work and it hasn't made sex work go away nor has it made sex work any safer or fairer for the sex workers, it just made it worse. Why do you want to try the same thing again to get different results?
>>2518887> Most people work shitty jobs they don't like because they have to do whatever they can do to make enough money, most workers of every kind are coerced into doing whatever it is they do.Literally this is the point. This is what anon
>>2518750 was saying. Wage labour itself is immoral more generally, but sex work
uniquely degrading.
Look
retard I'm not mad at women that get put in a position where they have to get raped in order to afford groceries, just like I'm not mad at construction workers that have to do backbreaking and dangerous manual labour to pay rent.
I have nothing but sympathy for sex
workers, but I disdain the phenomenon of sex
work. Several of my friends have either tried starting an OF or still actively do it.
> Many sex workers, probably most of them nowadays, are just people doing it partially for their own enjoyment and partially as a side hustle and it's not something they even do for a living, never mind are being compelled or coerced into doing.Bullshit. Are you seriously claiming the most sex workers would still do it if they didn't need to make money? I'll admit there's a slim minority that enjoys the attention/aesthetic/whatever, and would do it for free, but they're not the ones I'm concerned with.
I'll also admit that the majority of sex work transitioning to digital has made it a safer kind of wage labour (no STDs, pimps, etc), but the psychological damage can still be there. If I could push a button that would make all sex workers exclusively labour online, I'd do it.
> Our society has already tried your method of slut shaming and burying our heads in the sand for centuries as a reaction to the phenomenon of sex work and it hasn't made sex work go away nor has it made sex work any safer or fairer for the sex workers, it just made it worse. Why do you want to try the same thing again to get different results?Sex work is a subset of wage labour, which must (and will) be abolished. I'm anti sex
work, not anti sex. Orgies and sex parties? Go for it. Go be as promiscuous as you want, as long as you're having fun and no one's forcing you to do it. The OF models that make millions are essentially sex celebrities and they are fundamentally a different class of person than the financially stressed yoga mom mentioned earlier.
To summarize for your addled brain
<sex work bad<sex workers good >>2518975>Are you seriously claiming the most sex workers would still do it if they didn't need to make money?Are you asking if people would still have sex for fun, or if people would still incorporate sex into their entertainment and performance art? The answer to both is, yes. People would still watch other people fuck or jerk off or perform other sexual acts, people would still perform sexual acts in front of audiences of friends and strangers, there would still be orgies and bdsm parties and every kind of sexual activity you can possibly imagine, with or without capitalism.
You're trying to single out sex work as something fundamentally different from other kinds of work but you're not making a very strong case for it. Seems like all these things you are saying about sex work could be said about any other kind of work.
>>2518975I think the type of people who typically get into sex work, especially at the professional full-time level, are not the broken fucked up desperate outcasts you insinuate them to be. They are typically people with a quite a high level of self-confidence - I mean, you have to possess a certain level of confidence to be a public performer of any kind, let alone a performer that does something as candid and personal as adult content.
I think that's the real issue is, you don't see it as real work. You think it's some kind of copout, it's an alternative to work. But having to regularly churn out quality content, promote and manage that content on multiple platforms, network and build a brand, cultivate and maintain a fanbase, be self-employed and manage all of your finances and taxes yourself, all of that requires a lot of confidence and creativity and business sense and a lot of fucking work.
>>2518865People talk less about women who have sex with male prostitutes because they make up a tiny fraction (about 1%) of people who have sex with prostitutes. It's like complaining that people don't talk enough about female rapists while men commit 95% of rapes.
>>2518887>Many sex workers, probably most of them nowadays, are just people doing it partially for their own enjoyment and partially as a side hustle and it's not something they even do for a living, never mind are being compelled or coerced into doingThis is total bullshit. Just because you happen to know all about onlyfans models or whatever doesn't mean they make up anywhere near the majority of "sex workers". Millions of women worldwide are "sex workers", not because it's a "side hustle" or they enjoy it, but because they are literal slaves. Incidentally, studies have shown that legalizing "sex work" significantly
increased rates of sex trafficking, contrary to claims by pro-prostitution activists.
>Countries with legalized prostitution are associated with higher human trafficking inflows than countries where prostitution is prohibited. The scale effect of legalizing prostitution, i.e. expansion of the market, outweighs the substitution effect, where legal sex workers are favored over illegal workers. On average, countries with legalized prostitution report a greater incidence of human trafficking inflows.>Criminalization of prostitution in Sweden resulted in the shrinking of the prostitution market and the decline of human trafficking inflows. Cross-country comparisons of Sweden with Denmark (where prostitution is decriminalized) and Germany (expanded legalization of prostitution) are consistent with the quantitative analysis, showing that trafficking inflows decreased with criminalization and increased with legalization.A study on prostitutes in the US found that they were several times more likely to have PTSD than veterans (70% vs ~20%), and roughly equivalent to rates among rape survivors. Around 80% had been threatened with a weapon or physically assaulted as prostitutes. 84% were or had been homeless. Prostitutes were more likely to be injured than any other profession. Six in ten had been victims of CSA. Nine in ten wanted to leave prostitution.
>>2519026There's how prostitution is "fundamentally different from other kinds of work". It's one of the worst and most dangerous professions there is (and legalizing it won't fix it).
>>2518768People have been committing murder and rape as long as humanity has existed, should we just give up and let them?
This entire recent push to legalize "sex work" was started and funded by pimps (often posing as the prostitutes they victimize). Virtually any pro-"sex work" organization you look at will have pimps in the leadership and/or ties to human trafficking.
I'd also suggest you see what historical communists had to say on the matter - neither Marx nor Engels nor Lenin supported it.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/kollonta/1921/prostitution.htm >>2519119I mean the topic was sex work so I focused on what constitutes the majority of sex work these days, which is adult online content. Street prostitution is like nothing compared to that, we're talking about multiple platforms with hundreds of millions of sex workers selling their content online, that is what sex work is now. Welcome to the 21st century, George.
But if you want to talk about just straight up traditional prostitution, it's just another kind of sex work, and another kind of work in general. You can have a business that is transparent to the public where the employees have a certain level of leverage against the employer, like a brothel owned and operated by women who run the business democratically and the law protects the employees to some degree and holds the employer responsible for their safety; or you can have a giant windowless castle called Mar-A-Lago where billionaires are down in a dungeon somewhere raping children with impunity. It's not about the type of labor, it's about the power dynamic.
>>2518975>I'll also admit that the majority of sex work transitioning to digital has made it a safer kind of wage labour Are you fucking stupid? it hasn't traditioned, that is a different market.
>>2519026If you seriously think that sex workers would still have sex with the same people at the same frequency without pay, you have the intelligence of a small slug or perhaps a piece of paper
it's so funny that people bring out OF in these conversations, like it wasn't mostly a pyramid scheme pretending to be an adult content platform pretending to be a patron subscription. 99% of women arent making ends meet with OF.
>>2519168also how horrible is it that OF's rise in popularity was during covid, AKA when many people were desperate for incomes and couldn't leave their houses a corporation comes in to steal money off of selling their bodies
>>2518887I know many sex workers, they're doing it for the money - not for "fun"
At any rate, there is no systemic conspiracy to encourage women to participate in sex work. Western society's deeply-instilled Judeo-Christian morality is still going strong, sex work and prostitution and promiscuity are still taboo, sex and nudity are still considered filthy and shameful, even in the most liberal societies. No parent wants to find out that their child has an OnlyFans, regardless of their political leanings.
>>2519184Most of the people who are doing sex work these days don't make that much money, not nearly enough to live on. It's like being a professional musician or an actor. Nobody gets into it for the money and if they do, they're probably going to be sorely disappointed, unless they happen to be extremely determined and lucky.
>>2519168I should make it clear that, when I said the porn biz is less sleazy today than it used to be, it's still pretty sleazy. And with the gig economy there's all kinds of avenues for subtle algorithmic sleaze to exploit and abuse workers. But again, these are labor problems not sex problems.
>>2519231well they also mostly receive benefits, so it adds nicely to that
The temptation to romanticize sex work by people like you, or any form of informal survival hustle, as inherently subversive is a variation of the same idealism that treats “the bourgeoisie” as a cloud. To confuse autonomy from a boss with autonomy from capital is to miss the point: capital is not simply the wage relation in its factory form, but the total social relation that structures survival. Marx was clear that the lumpenproletariat, including those operating through illicit or stigmatized economies, are not outside capital but subordinated to it in distorted form. Their work does not abolish exploitation; it recirculates value through shadow markets, intermediaries, and now platform capital itself. When sex work flourished as an oppositional survival strategy, it was never because it negated capitalism, but because it allowed individuals to maneuver within its cracks. The arrival of OnlyFans did not “gentrify” a once-radical practice; it revealed that even the most stigmatized forms of hustling are always vulnerable to commodification and enclosure. Just as the haute bourgeoisie weaponizes lumpen elements as disposable instruments of counterrevolution, the petit accumulation of the hustler, whether through drug networks, smuggling, or sex work, does not challenge the mode of production but risks reproducing it on a micro scale. There is nothing revolutionary about climbing from proletarian precarity into petit-bourgeois entrepreneurialism through illicit means. Subversion does not lie in individual exit strategies but in collective struggle to rupture the whole system of capital’s reproduction.
A common mistake in left discourse is to talk about “the bourgeoisie” as if it were a shapeless cloud floating above society, producing exploitation without visible machinery or human agency. This is politically lazy, theoretically idealist, and fundamentally anti-Marxist. Marx understood class as a real, structured formation, with identifiable fractions, alliances, and contradictions. Without tracing those internal structures, our politics is reduced to moral outrage and protest ritual, not strategy.
C. Wright Mills helped break through the fog with his power elite concept: corporate, political, and military leaders form a self-reinforcing oligarchy through shared institutions, elite universities, think tanks, corporate boards, and military command networks. Aaron Good, in American Exception, deepens this by showing how the U.S. state is best understood as tripartite:
The Public State, the visible, elected layer of governance.
The Deep State, the permanent security, intelligence, and covert-ops apparatus.
The Duopoly System, the bipartisan elite party structure that manages dissent and ensures policy continuity for ruling-class interests.
Good argues that the U.S. ruling order operates within a framework of “exceptionism”, the Schmittian concept that sovereignty lies in the state of legal exception a state acts upon for its self-preservation and “higher immorality” — a shared elite ethos that systemic criminality is acceptable when it benefits the class as a whole. This is not moral corruption in the abstract; it is a structural feature of bourgeois power, binding together factions that otherwise compete.
Marx in The Eighteenth Brumaire observed how the haute bourgeoisie could weaponize the lumpenproletariat as street muscle, a reactionary shock force against workers. Good’s work shows how this practice has been modernized and globalized: the U.S. deep state has repeatedly partnered with criminalized intermediaries, foreign mercenaries, paramilitaries, gangs, to advance imperial interests. This is part of what Good calls elite illegalism: the routine use of illicit means by elite actors, shielded from accountability, to maintain and expand power.
This is not just an occasional moral lapse. It is a mode of governance. CIA-linked drug networks in Southeast Asia’s Golden Triangle, heroin production under U.S.-aligned mujahideen in Afghanistan, Contra cocaine trafficking in Central America, Balkan heroin routes under NATO protection, even tolerated human trafficking networks — these are not “rogue” episodes. They are deliberate strategies that:
Provide off-the-books funding for covert ops.
Reward loyal intermediaries.
Destabilize or weaken target societies.
Maintain plausible deniability for the public state.
The recent public release of parts of the Epstein list is a striking example of how elite illegalism operates in the realm of social control. Epstein’s network, intersecting finance, intelligence, and politics, functioned not merely as a personal vice operation but as a potential leverage system for elements within the haute bourgeoisie and intelligence services. The mingling of billionaires, senior politicians, royalty, and corporate executives in a criminal network of trafficking and abuse underscores Good’s point: the boundaries between the “respectable” public elite and the covert criminal underworld are porous by design. Such scandals are rarely prosecuted to the top because they are structurally protected, serving both as blackmail tools and as demonstrations of elite impunity.
Seen through the Mills–Good framework, Epstein’s operation bridged all three layers of the tripartite state. It touched the public state through politicians and regulators who were compromised or protected him. It connected to the deep state through ties to intelligence-linked figures and agencies that allegedly facilitated his travel, funding, and immunity. And it intersected with the duopoly system via bipartisan political patrons and donors. In this way, the scandal illustrates that elite illegalism is not a peripheral feature of the ruling class, it is one of the hidden ligaments binding together its different organs of power.
Critically, this line of analysis is not a drift into right-wing conspiracism. The reactionary fringe often hijacks these scandals to promote antisemitic tropes, nationalist myths, or culture-war diversions. A Marxist analysis rejects such mystifications. We focus instead on the material relations, the fusion of capital accumulation, state power, and covert criminal networks, that give these scandals their systemic function. This is not about chasing lurid personalities; it is about exposing how capitalism at its imperial core integrates legal governance and organized crime into a unified class project.
By treating the bourgeoisie as a cloud, we erase the material integration between the “legal” and “illegal” sides of imperial capitalism. We miss how the haute bourgeoisie works through specific nodes: finance capital, energy conglomerates, arms manufacturers, private intelligence contractors, and transnational banks that launder illicit proceeds.
Good’s thesis reminds us: the U.S. ruling class is not simply a national capitalist elite. It is an imperial bloc that fuses state power, covert networks, and transnational capital into a single operational system. Within this bloc, bourgeois factions compete for policy dominance but share the deep-state machinery that protects the whole class. Understanding these internal divisions, and their shared illegalism, is not an academic luxury. It is the only way to identify contradictions.
>>2518622Does it not happen in places where proatitution is illegal? Like if you show me some study that shows legalisation of prostitution leads to more human trafficking I am willing to accept it, but I see no reason to just assume that.
>>2519261feminists make these studies but they just define any woman moving countries and engaging in sex work to be 'human trafficking' lol
>>2519261>This paper has investigated the impact of legalized prostitution on inflows of humantrafficking. According to economic theory, there are two effects of unknown magnitude. The scale effect of legalizing prostitution leads to an expansion of the prostitution market and thus an increase in human trafficking, while the substitution effect reduces demand for trafficked prostitutes by favoring prostitutes who have legal residence in a country. Our quantitative empirical analysis for a cross-section of up to 150 countries shows that the scale effect
dominates the substitution effect. On average, countries with legalized prostitution experience a larger degree of reported human trafficking inflows.
https://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.405653.de/diw_econsec0071.pdf >>2519148If women weren't being forced into prostitution under threat of poverty and violence, it would cease to exist as a profession. Nearly no one wants to be a prostitute. As another anon pointed out, it's literally an industry built around rape. That's what paid sex is - if you are being corerced by poverty to have sex with people, then that is rape. No one with a functioning brain would deny that about, say, a landlord who threatens to evict his tenants unless they have sex with him, but if his tenants instead have to have sex with a hundred different men somehow this is considered different.
And no, porn is just a new type of prostitution. It's an incredibly abusive industry which harms the women forced to act in porn. They are also coerced by poverty and the porn industry is also a center of human trafficking. It's even the same people who are victimized: 49% of sexually exploited women reported that in addition to being forced to engage in prostitution, porn of them was distributed, and most pornstars are also forced to engage in traditional prostitution as well. Injuries and abuse are common (often purposefully done so videos of women being brutalized can be sold), suicide rates are through the roof, and most women acting in porn want to leave (the average pornstar will quit within 3 months). Often, those who stay find that they can't leave because no one is willing to hire a pornstar. It's also common for pornstars to be groomed into the industry while underage by pornographers. The average pornstar won't live past the age of 36.
While we're on the subject, by the way, porn (like prostitution) has been shown time and time again to foster positive attitudes towards rape and abuse (and porn use has been correlated in numerous studies with an increased likelihood of committing rape/abuse).
People try to cover things up with this idea of an imaginary woman who loves being a "sex worker", but it has no basis in reality. It's a total fiction made up by pimps and pornographers to hide the horrific abuse that goes on in the industry.
>>2519261Here's your study.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X12001453#s0030 >>2518810One thing is actual sex work (someone being paid to pleasure someone) and another is sexual content creation (someone producing sexual media to sell to someone). Sexual content creation encompasses both people making porn and people making furry inflation hentai, in sexual content creation the (sexual) content creator is making a product (the sexual media).
In sexual content creation, the content creator isn't pleasuring anyone, they're just selling the media produced out of it to whomever may want so they pleasure themselves to it. In a sense, they're selling a product that helps with the masturbation process, akin to a dildo or a VR pussytron dick destroyer 3000 with advanced ball massaging technology.
Sexual content creation in of itself is "harmless", but under capitalism it does have a real sex trafficking problem, and it is really intertwined with actual sex work, but they are two separate things.
>>2519272this paper is kinda iffy because the theory is sound, there's an increased demand of prostitution because it's largely more affordable, since brothers or pimps or whatever have no need to employ protection rackets or whatever, but then it leaps forward and assumes the same for illegal trafficking, the only incentive for it being tax avoidance. seems like in both cases the onus is on enforcement, a cheeky co-relation that the authors decide to obfuscate by deliberately omitting countries with lots of impunity in their analysis because "it's too noisy" AKA it fucks with their conclusion
>>2519355>eems like in both cases the onus is on enforcementby that i mean, that inflows of human trafficking depends more on law enforcement of human trafficking rather than the legal status of prostitution. seems like it would be obvious?
kill yourself retarded faggot
>>2519355>this paper is kinda iffy because the theory is sound, there's an increased demand of prostitution because it's largely more affordable,Yes, that's literally what scaling means. Like why else do you think that trafficking would increase otherwise if not via price changes and induced demand? Are you actually retarded? Do you think people consult prostitutes because they are evil and evil people do evil things like consulting prostitutes? No idiot, it's a fucking service that is subject to market forces like any other one.
>More cops will solve the problem. We need more cops!!!Lmaooo.
>>2519375That's what the paper certainly implies
>>2519387You know what improves enforcement? Reducing the incidence rate of human trafficking by banning prostitution all together. Lmao.
>>2519390I mean thats their argument, that the increased price for procuring prostitution is related to the amount of protection brothers and pimps need to employ, it's like fairly straighforward, what's hard to get here
>>2519320Here is a similar experiment where they had the same result but it's not about prostitution but the ivory trade. Basically a few African governments tried to experiment with partially legalizing the ivory trade from their stockpiles with disasterous results.
Instead of mitigating the effects of pouching it triggered an explosion of induced demand, increase in pouching, same result as in the prostitution dilemma.
https://www.science.org/content/article/legalizing-ivory-trade-wont-save-elephants-study-concludes >>2519231> Nobody gets into it for the money If you're being pedantic then yes. They do it for the drugs.
Pure fantasists in this thread, i swear to god.
>>2519393Yes and? Where is your rebuttal to the study? Why do you keep repeating things just back at others because you are uncomfortable with the conclusions?
>>2519231>Nobody gets into it for the moneyIdealism
>>2519397>Yes and? That the correlation with increased illegal prostitution corresponds with rates of impunity, doh doi, and they deliberately obfuscate a most obvious relation.
>>2519375>>More cops will solve the problem. We need more cops!!!>Lmaooo.Ok I want to see you enforce any prohibition without cops, dumdum
>>2519400Impunity yes, the biggest impunity being prostitution being legal in the first place. So again where is your rebuttal?
>>2519404>Impunity yes, the biggest impunity being prostitution being legal in the first place. Dumb tautology that argues nothing, we're talking about human trafficking
>>2519403>>2519407Human trafficking which is shown to increase under legalization in absolute terms in a study of looking at 150 countries.
>Hey there is this sector of the economy that is prone to increased crime rates when it is decriminalized shown in numerous empirical studies. Let's increase the police state to deal with the issue that is worse under decriminalization for no reason instead of a ban, effectively giving this special sector a government subsidy for its continued existence because well just because.
>Yes I am a leftist of course.You unironically believe that this is a sane position lmao.
>>2519409decriminalised/legalised prostitution is kind of a misnomer, pro sex-work people want you to believe that it will all go in to regulated brothels but the reality is even if you have legal brothels and so on many of the people who are prostitutes, the countless now in mine and your cities for example, will not meet the requirements for the brothel, wrt to health, tax, work eligibility, and so on, forcing them into illegal/unregulated trade and potentially (likely) making their reality even more dangerous than it was before.
>>2519410I think prostitution should be banned because it has been empirically shown that legalization leads to increased rates of human trafficking. In my opinion 'anti-moralists' are either ignoring any evidence on this matter out of bad faith or because they are ignorant on the issue of prostitution all-together.
This is just obvious compulsive reactionary thinking, feminists changed their minds about porn and are okay with it now, so naturally the anti-feminists have to follow suit and reverse their position on the issue as well.
>>2519412Yes, you just described the substitution effect being inferior like in the study I linked. Thanks I guess.
"Prostitution causes human trafficking" is the same sentence as "labor causes human trafficking". No, it's capital. And you can't ban labor, anymore than you can ban breathing.
>>2519400Exactly, legalization allows the legal sector being used as a cover for the illicit one like in the ivory example where legal ivory is the used to launder ivory from illegal sources. So the conclusion is that legalization because it allows for cover among other reasons which causes human trafficking to increase in absolute terms. Thus legalization should be opposed.
>>2519424This is lame, vulgar analysis by someone who has skimmed the Communist manifesto best. Treating the mechanism of exploitation, capital and the bourgeoisie as some immutable black boxes is a form of quasi-theological idealism.
>>2518768Using the term "oldest profession" as synonym for prostitution actually comes from a short story written in 1888 by Rudyard Kipling. The same person from who came up with the phrase "white man's burden". The story itself takes place in British India and is about a prostitute who convinces a British customer of hers to help her friend in getting a second friend escape from a prison. The latter two friends are successful, but then it turns out there is an anti-British rebellion taking place at the same time (afaik inadvertently inspired by them), which starts celebrating them as heroes. In reality the first guy who helped his friend escape is a Westernised muslim who doesn't really hate British people or oppose British rule, so basically a comprador gusano piece of trash. In the end the real organiser of the rebellion is a woman who works as a cock sleeve for powerful men and it all happens because of her personal interests.
Comedic or not, the story implies that the British
don't actually rule over India because that would be an oVeRSiMpliFiCaTioN. Uhmm sweety you see there are some paid off traitor Indians who don't really oppose the British that much, so you can't say that ALL Indians want independence. Saying "Brits are bad" ErASeSeS ThE uNdERlyInG cOMpLeXiTy oF tHe sItUaTiOn.
In general the idea that you can't ban certain economic phenomena because "there are different kinds of people and there will always be the kind of people who want to do X thing" reeks of extreme liberal idealism and individualism (class is nothing but a state of mind and a consequence of personal choices). What's next? That it's impossible to ban child labour because how are you going to stop Little Timmy from climbing into mineshafts? Or that chattel slavery is impossible to abolish because some people are always more obedient than other?
Even if prostitution existed before capitalism, it absolutely led to its proliferation because of two reasons: urbanisation with the according increase in the division of labour and the creation of permanent structural unemployment, that is the reserve army of labour in Marxist terms. The latter would definitely be abolished and has been abolished under communist regimes, along with overt forms of prostitution. (The semi-feudal bourgeois regimes abolished by communists in Eastern Europe were very d3g3nerate, in fact, in my country prostitution was officially regulated by the police before communism, the chief of police basically acted as the pimp king.) Prostitution under socialism would see a marked decrease. The reason why Kipling's phrase got so popular so recently should be obvious to everyone (capitalism and bourgeois d£g£neracy).
If you think just for a few seconds about what would have medieval Europeans called the oldest profession is very easy to deduce. The most important text that was the primary basis for people's worldview was the Bible. Everything written in it was taken as fact. If you have at least a cursory knowledge of the book you would know that the very concept labour was created after the fall from paradise (it itself most likely an allegory for pre-state hunter-gatherer societies). We don't know much about Adam and Eve's lives after their banishment from paradise, but we do know that the third and fourth humans, Cain and Abel were a farmer and shepherd respectively. Which makes a lot of sense, as the two most distinct ways of pre-modern living were settled agriculture and nomadic pastoralism, and these two kinds of societies were in constant conflict.
>>2519433Do you have a problem with the claim that everything in capitalism is driven by profit fundamentally?
>>2519438No, but I have problems with people like you using this claim as sort of thought-stopper for deeper analysis because you are intellectually lazy. 'Maaan it's just all capitalism maaan!' OK, thanks for your valuable contribution I guess? Are you even aware that Marx himself wrote extensively about certain and particular branches of specific industries?
'we don't need rape as a concept it's just assault, you're just moralising assault.'
>>2519442Cite a single Marx/Engels/Lenin passage that implies labor causes slavery. You can't, because there is none.
>>2519451Plenty of that in his writings about the cotton mill and colonialism in chapter 31 of Capital.
>>2519447You mean prostitution was mundane under feudalism.
>>2518511Buying sex from another person is not something we would want in a socialist or communist society. That includes marriage.
Sex work in the sense you create a video or image is a different beast because it creates a vendable commodity and is productive.
>>2519447At a time when the vast majority of people were rural residents for whom making children was a life or death necessity because more children meant more people helping you working the land and the women had to constantly pump out babies to have enough of them make it into adulthood until they themselves get old and start needing someone to take care of them, it doesn't matter what was going on in "major" cities. "Family values" were not a lifestyle choice but a matter of survival for most people.
Bayonett pimps. Beat johns publically and let the community handle them how they wish.
>>2519476>Bayonett pimps. Beat johns publically and let the community handle them how they wish.You Have Said The Actual Truth.
>>2519474Except "family values" is a capitalist invention. You had your household (which did not necessarily have blood-related people, for example lodgers, apprentices, servants and slaves) and you had your community (the people around you in about a 20 mile radius). And as the article says, rural women engaged in prostitution as well, not to mention, to once again debunk your "family values" misconception, it is documented in the lives of medieval peasants that promiscuity was rampant, that people literally fucked in their local churches.
>>2519476>>2519505Unlimited genocide on the sex merchants. Our time is cumming. Long live Qinism-Linbiaoism-DecommodifiedSex Thought!
Weird my reply about how prostitution is a waste of resources seems to have disappeared…
You Marxist dorks should be happy about the modern era of porn and sex work - it's a rare instance of a democratizing technology (internet, affordable digital cameras) allowing workers to seize the means of production of an entire industry. Sex workers certainly couldn't do that in the pre-digital era. You know how much film fucking costs?
>>2519281>If women weren't being forced into prostitution under threat of poverty and violence, it would cease to exist as a profession.In many ancient pre-Christian civilizations like Rome or Greece or Babylon, prostitution was socially acceptable and normal and often had religious connotations associated with fertility goddesses, temples doubling as brothels, etc. We're so accustomed to the sexual repression in our post-pagan system of morality that we forget that there was a time when it was normal in civilized society for people to go to a temple where random strangers are all fucking and sucking and jerking each other off in a wild violent sex orgy with deranged chanting priestesses throwing pig blood on them and all the other weird shit they did back then. Morality is arbitrary and cultural attitudes about sex and prostitution change all the time.
>>2519375>>More cops will solve the problem. We need more cops!!!Do you honestly believe your local cops don't know who the local pimps are? If cops had a reason to, pimps would disappear overnight. And this has nothing to do with whether prostitution is legal or not. So yes, that anon you're mocking is correct, that the lack of enforcement against pimps is the problem. That the public at large gets caught up in this "sex work is/isn't work" shit instead of pimps is part of the disorder you are engaging in right now.
>>2519535Your point has already been debunked here
>>2519254before you actually made it. Fyi.
>>2519546And again it's the pro-sex work freaks who have to contort and ignore until they make it about moralism.
Beyond parody.
>>2519556>Do you honestly believe your local cops don't know who the local pimps are? If cops had a reason to, pimps would disappear overnight.>And that's why we need to give more power to pimps by legalization and more power to cops by increasing the police state!You people and your mental gymnastics are incredible. Even in the face of hard empirical evidence you try to cling to your shitty dog. Dogmatic beliefs accusing others of being 'moralists'. You are the fucking moral dogmatists here.
>>2519546>In many ancient pre-Christian civilizations like Rome or Greece or Babylon, prostitution was socially acceptable and normal and often had religious connotations associated with fertility goddesses, temples doubling as brothels, etc.
>Prostitution was completely normal in feudal and slave society.EXACTLY, IT'S A VESTIGE OF THOSE SOCIETIES AND THAT'S WHY IT NEEDS TO BE BANNED, DUMBASS.
>>2519564Turn on your brain and re-read the post.
>>2519567Anon you will never get through to a man determined to justify his misogyny.
>>2519572I re-read again. It's apologist drivel by someone giving cover for a dude who thinks 'enforcement is the problem' and who argued that legalization thus increasing human trafficking in absolute terms can be mitigated by increasing the police state (no reason was given as to why this is diserable when human trafficking can be reduced by banning prostitution all-together). Worse you are actually undermining the point of the previous poster insofar as you are saying that the police is corrupt (likely because of a structural issue).
This does nothing to convince me or anyone else as to why neither need a bigger police state nor legalizing prostitute, more like the total opposite.
Look, it's another thread of Westerners defending their harmful treatlerism in the face of opposing empirical evidence from their own social scientists, using crackpot and racist historical arguments ultimately coming to crude, pro-capitalist and anti-socialist conclusions.
>>2519580The point isn't legalization or "more cops". The point is the lack of enforcement against pimps: the fundamental issue that persists regardless of legality or the number of cops.
>>2519583westerners didn't invent prostitution retard
>>2519546You really tried to hark back to when it was 'normal' and the prostitutes were literally non-citizen slaves to be bought and sold from birth.
Mental.
>>2519587The fundamental point is that criminalization decreases human trafficking which is backed by numerous studies and literature on the matter.
You can try to divert from this point, conjure any argument (backed without any proof) cry and shout, stomp your little feet, clap your hands and scream like a little toddler. It doesn't change that this is an empirical fact.
>>2519591cool strawman, unfortunately the post you are referring to has never made that claim
>>2518511>There is literally nothing wrong with sex as transaction.There is no ethical prostitution under capitalism. Same goes to every job. But having prostitution as a job during socialism is something I can get behind on
if you catch my drift.
>>2519596lol bodied that chud
>free prostitution services for workers with GFE experiences
Did I just solve the incel epidemic?
>>2519596In other words, you don't care about pimping existing, you just don't want it to be incentivised. You are a liberal.
I, on the other hand, don't want pimping to exist AT ALL. I am a communist.
This is where we differ.
>>2519609Of course not. The ideal would be brothels run by prostitutes instead of pimps.
>>2519604Do you mean without?
>>2519616And yet, all you're doing is defending the status quo, where pimping continues to exist.
>>2519609You know how to get rid off pimping? Making prostitution illegal.
>>2519624Not the same poster, dumbass. Also 'prostitution without pimps' already exists in countries with legalized and de-criminalized prostitution and it's an utter failure because it doesn't have any measureable effect on undercutting human trafficking.
>>2519616I don't agree with this.
>>2519624If you want ethical work under capitalism then worker-cooperatives are the solution. But its just a band-aid solution to all the ills of capitalism
>>2519632>Making prostitution illegal. It is already illegal. Pimps still exist.
>human traffickingIs pimping, yes.
>>2519639And in countries where legalization happened pimping increased and human trafficking increased so stop arguing in favor of legalization and shut up.
>>2519641I don't care about what is written on the paper, liberal, I care about getting rid of pimps.
>>2519643>I don't care about what is written on the paper, liberal, I care about getting rid of pimps.I am literally the only one ITT whose views are informed by actual factual evidence. Don't you dare go around calling others liberals when your views are completely based on feelz and romantic notions.
>>2519654So defending the status quo.
>>2518525He literally gave a utilitarian analysis
People act like prostitution is such a degrading way to earn money but honestly, people debase themselves in much worse ways for money these days, to the point where selling your body on the street almost feels like a quaint and noble trade, like being a blacksmith or something. At least you're not an influencer or a tech startup entrepeneur.
>>2519719>le degradingNobody cares. What matters is that it's objectively more
dangerous than any of those things.
retard people on this site.
>>2519667The status quo of whom? I live in a country where prostitution is completely legal.
>>2519719Nobody gives a crap, stop trying to poison the discussion with moralism in order to then turn around and wield the accusation of moralism as a strawman.
OP is one of those smarmy liberals who says
>"why do you deny the agency of Palestinians? actually its racist to say they can't do war crimes and rape babies"
Contrapoints socialists are truly degenerate, don't waste your time on such vile creatures
> the activity itself is irrelevant
YALL POSTING IN A WORTHLESS GAMERCHAIR PSEUD THREAD LMAO
>>2519119You know full well that even in places also rife with male (including child) prostitution (Afghanistan, Pakistan, South East Asia, Russia and Ukraine in the 1990s), the focus remains on female prostitution.
>>2518975It's "uniquely degrading" because people are caught up in capitalist, feudalist and caste like notions of what constitutes honorable or degrading work. And what the social role sex ought to be.
Like why is sucking a dick more degrading than being a spat upon as a service worker or a female police agent? Or you know, 'dalit' sanitation workers in places like India forced to wade through literal human shit.
Or what about those working in hospitality or as stewardesses, forced to pretend they're happy and having a good day and are totally not annoyed by obnoxious guests and passengers. Why is this less degrading than a woman pretending to have an organism?
All wage labor is degrading in that it prevents us from living "authentic" lives. Some jobs may discipline bodies, time, and appearances more so than others. But generally it's all capable of being physically damaging and psychologically alienating.
The usually retort that one can be "pro sex workers" whilst being "anti sex work" is ultimately silly. Like what other line of work triggers these statements? Do you see anyone claiming they're "pro nurse" but "anti nursing"? It's obfuscation. People aren't willing to confront their attitudes to sex and the relation between power and sex (under capitalism). So they deflect with platitudes about how they 'support' sex workers, but are anti sex work.
>>2519639Not illegal here. Pimping is tho.
>>2519791Sit the fuck down Ghislaine Maxwell. Under socialism we'll kill you before you try to enslave children again. No, your brothel is not "work" you human trafficker.
Surely, if prostitution is rape, then all those engaging prostitution themselves, not strictly out of need, would be just as bad as pimps and johns then.
The average prostitute is a slave to their work, no contest., as is the average wage slave. But not all are average. Just like many wage workers fit into a PMC definition, some prostitutes (you may think of them in lighter terms, more glamorous, but selling your sex is prostitution no matter the perks) may too fit some class traitor denomination right?
>>2519809>Under socialismAt this rate capital is never going to be abolished. Especially considering even people on a supposed "leftist" platform aren't willing to seriously engage with why sex work is being singled out, and why people talk of
<sex work bad<sex workers goodBut there's no equivalent for other lines of work. (nurses good, nursing bad, etc. aka shit no one says)
And instead retort with platitudes or "lol u wanna fuck kids".
There's just no general drive to do some proper (self) critique. And dissect all the ideological baggage which informs people's worldviews. Instead it's
>Sex work is good actually because Romans fucked slavesor
>Sex work is bad because it's icky and sex is specialGrim man. Just fucking grim.
>>2519821I know your thirst to rape little children is so strong that you keep pretending this is some debate forum where we must philosophically come to an agreement to allow for prostitution but in reality I'm just going to kill you to protect the kids and there's nothing you can do about it you sophist.
>>2519823Case in point. Deeply unserious. No one here's suggesting we should have "socialist child prostitutes".
But it's obvious what's going on here, you're not looking to discuss, you intend to intimidate. 'Socialism' here is the road to obscene enjoyment. Under 'Socialism' you will be free to lynch all the "pedophiles" (people criticizing moralizing sex work), prostitutes (sexual lumpen, petite bourgeois onlyfans stars), and other 'degenerates' corrupting Communism. And everyone will clap.
Also as other poster said. You're not gonna do shit even if the nonsense you're saying was true. Actual bourgeois child fuckers already have names and addresses, but you wouldn't dare touch them because they have armed security details. Same goes for organized crime and pimps.
Considering you singled out my post but not others, it seems I also got a little too close to the actual issue: you're caught up in 'bourgeois' and feudal (reactionary) ideas about sex. And don't like being confronted, so instead of honestly engaging you lash out with juvenile violent fantasies.
Grow the fuck up.
>>2519840>Prostitution addict telling others to grow uplul
classical philosophers viewed self control and self discipline as virtuous long before the advent of Christianity but in the year of our lord 2025 we have deeply unserious porn addicts telling others to accept their addictions, and even proclaiming them to be normal and a progressive rebellion against "feudal" norms. prostitution is itself, as pointed out by others earlier, a feudal and slave-society-based norm.
>guys, what if the problem with prostitution are the pimps-
<SO YOU WANNA RAPE CHILDREN HUH??
how many layers of ideology are we on here
>>2519843>classical philosophers viewed self control and self discipline as virtuous long before the advent of Christianityyeah and they were also slaver aristos, why the fuck should we care what they think. fuck off.
>>2519843>prostitution addictThe farce continues. Where did I suggest I pursue prostitutes? Nowhere. But again, this is par for course as far as these discussions usually go.
No need to engage with the message because annil anon is a sexpat sexpest pedo who likes to fuck little children. What is this based on? Nothing but the moral cowardice of people who are not willing to take responsibility for their views, and instead deflect by claiming their critics are degenerates.
>classical philosophersAlso claimed the only moral good was avoiding pain, that slavery was good, hierarchy was good, that women should be treated like children and owned like property. Like what's your point?
None of this answers what you people find so particularly outrageous about sex work, that isn't shared with any other line of work.
Now on the subject of "medieval/ancient people practiced prostitution too"; true. They did. But that doesn't mean that the perceived ickiness of modern sex work can't be tied to inherited views of sex under patriarchal feudal/slave modes of production. After all, Rome was also the place where the Pater Familials had the right of capital punishment over his wife and daughters, include in case of (perceived) adultery.
Many things which in previous eras were also considered private and domestic, like cooking, caretaking (including 'medical'), even teaching have been commercialized, commodified and institutionalized since. But then why is sex work singled out, but not nursing or child care? Why the outrage over female onlyfans stars making millions, but not (or barely in comparison) professional (male) athletes? The issue here is the perceived sanctity of sex which isn't extended to other commodified, commercialized and institutionalized forms of labor.
There's also the reactionary idea that there is "good" and 'honorable' labor, versus the 'shameful' and 'sinful' labor that is sex work. Which is 1:1 feudal (and caste system) related attitudes projected unto socialism. As if all jobs under capitalism aren't bullshit jobs which perpetuate capital, discipline bodies and labor, and alienate us from living authentic lives.
Many here probably have no issue recognizing that the idea of "socialist sex work" and "communist brothels" and "socialist pimps" is ridiculous. But seldom is the same attitude extended to nursing, teaching, or the notion there will be laborers working in the "people's consumerist slop factory".
So in case of the latter, what is socialism then but the promise of a 'return' to a 'good' 'natural' order? Without all the 'modern capitalist degeneracy'? Because if you're gonna single out sex work, but not other forms of labor, what does this mean for your vision of communism?
>>2519864lot of yapping but in the end all this means is that you're mad others want to restrict you from buying sex from poor exploited women and everything you type is post-hoc justification for wanting to prey on kidnapped women. seethe harder.
Thought exercise for all the predators and pedos in this thread desperately trying to justify their exploitation:
What 12 year old girl, when asked what job she wants when she grows up, says that she wants to be a prostitute?
Is it not telling that the people who fall into this line of "work" (if it can even be called "work" at all) are invariably all desperate, bereft of material resources, or extremely alienated from society?
Does not socialism promise to fix all these root causes?
In what retarded scenario, therefore, would it even be possible for prostitution to exist under socialism?
>>2519872Mate I have no interest in prostitution. Sex is one of the last refuges of social activity which isn't (mostly) mediated through commodities. I can see why it might appeal to some (a temporary simulation of intimacy and connection, men who get off to the fantasy of dominating a woman especially if they feel sex is degrading in itself). But it's not for me.
I'm also convinced given the opportunity, most women will not choose sex work work over alternatives. But that's not what's being discussed here.
It's why you people are singling out sex work as unique bad. Compared to other work. Like you talk about "preying on women", as if this doesn't apply to garment workers in Bangladesh forced to work 12 hours shifts in poorly ventilated rooms, churning out fast fashion, with hundreds having died in past decades due to being locked in by their employers. Or you know dalit sanitation workers in India who live in poverty and are exposed to diseases.
I'm not the one seething here. All this moralizing grandstanding is a way to avoid having to deal with the actual critiques - why the moral outrage surrounding sex work, but not other types of (wage) labor.
You won't, because it would mean confronting your own anxieties, attitudes, and ingrained sexual pathologies. As well as what it means for socialism when people are singling out only prostitution and other sex work.
>>2519791>It's "uniquely degrading" because people are caught up in capitalist, feudalist and caste like notions of what constitutes honorable or degrading work. And what the social role sex ought to be.NO. IT"S BECAUSE THEY'RE REGULARLY FORCED INTO IT THROUGH LACK OF OPTIONS. THEY'RE REGULARLY VIOLENTLY RAPED. THEY'RE REGULARLY KILLED.
Pseud moralist faggot. just stop talking when you don't know what you're talking about.
>Like why is sucking a dick more degrading than being a spat upon as a service worker or a female police agent?GETTING RAPED, ABUSED, BEATEN, KILLED IS YOU STUPID FUCKING FAGGOT GO BACK TO DISCORD OR WHATEVER LOW EYEQUE SITE YOU COME FROM.
>>2518511Prostitution is commodified labor. Therefore it seems to me that as communists we ought to oppose it
>>2519873Aspiring to be a prostitute is disturbing, but so is wanting to be an 'influencer' where your whole life revolves around playing a non stop act for the enjoyment of your faceless audience. Or really any (capitlaist) bullshit 'job'. For the same reasons. It's dreaming of adult subservience to capital.
>In what retarded scenario, therefore, would it even be possible for prostitution to exist under socialism?Here's a better question: Why would any existing capitalist 'job' or 'career' exist under socialism at all? Or are you going to argue some types of commodification and commercialization are okay, but not others? Why would nurses and teachers exist in a world where people do not have to get up at 9 AM in the morning to work an 8-12 hour shift? And can instead spend their days with their children and family? Why would doctors exist the way they do now when all knowledge is freely available and no longer institutionally gated?
There's just an utter lack of imagination at play here.
You can talk of those involved in prostitution being "invariably all desperate, bereft of material resources, or extremely alienated from society?" but that goes for other lines of work too. Like what's the difference here? The fact you find sex shameful and icky? Or what?
>>2519885hue hue hue imagine caring about rape, this is moralism. Back when we were slaves it was fine, git gud.
>>2519595>You really tried to hark back to when it was 'normal' and the prostitutes were literally non-citizen slaves to be bought and sold from birth.There was a whole class hierarchy with prostitutes, just like there is today. But in societies where sex and prostitution were culturally sanctioned, the hierarchy was a lot more diverse. There were slaves and catamites who were treated as lower than animals, and at the other end of the spectrum there were holy priestesses whose job was to perform religious sex magic rituals with kings and nobility and it was considered a very sacred and revered profession.
>>2519885>NO. IT"S BECAUSE THEY'RE REGULARLY FORCED INTO IT THROUGH LACK OF OPTIONS. THEY'RE REGULARLY VIOLENTLY RAPED. THEY'RE REGULARLY KILLED.There's nothing unique about this. Ordinary proles are killed for striking or cynically allowed to die in workplace accidents or left with lifelong disabilities because their employers skirt safety regulations. Proles the world over are forced to work jobs they hate for lack of options. I for one for example can't think of a single job I've worked that I would've worked if not out of necessity. And at least one has left me with lifelong disabilities.
Your stance is moralizing and incoherent and you're seemingly livid because there are people not willing to simply play along with the ridiculous notion of sex work being unique bad.
>GETTING RAPED, ABUSED, BEATENYou lack life experience if you're unaware of how injury, threats of bodily harm, abuse and refusal to pay aren't day to day occurrences in other industries, especially outside the 'developed world'.
Prostitution should be made legal and regulated. Women should only pay a 5% tax ( needs to have a form of ID registered to their local government) . Men should be tested prior to sleeping with women and cannot be under the influence of alcohol, drugs, or any other substance. Local government will provide medical care and testing. Housing can be provided but not required to stay.
>>2519873What 12 year old dreams of picking produce under the heat of the sun for hours on end for a paltry allowance below minimum wage when they're in high school? The dreams of 12 year olds are like the dreams of my dick (i.e. if you base your politics on the dreams of 12 year olds, you are profoundly retarded, possibly in need of psychiatric help, due to your disconnect from reality)
>>2519896Just as a reality check for anyone who might be getting turned on by this, the holy sex priestesses of ancient pagan empires probably did not resemble contemporary depictions of sexual attractiveness, they were probably elderly fat women with huge sagging tits.
>>2519899Ah, lies. The first refuge of the fascist.
Back to /pol/ with you,
also, kill yourself now, faggot.
In order to help women, they must be separated from men, as men are statistically a danger to women.
If you disagree with this, you need to go back to /pol/.
>>2519906I'm a little turned off but not completely.
>>2518520>Therefore prostitution is illegal under all socialist states.It's technically not illegal in Cuba but pimping is (apparently).
>>2519119>People talk less about women who have sex with male prostitutes because they make up a tiny fraction (about 1%) of people who have sex with prostitutes. It's like complaining that people don't talk enough about female rapists while men commit 95% of rapes.Not sure what to think about this subject, but if you're going to try and eliminate prostitution, it seems better to go after third-party organizers of prostitution, and people who abduct or traffic women and children, since having the police go around arresting these exploited people seems like creating further injury.
I'm really skeptical of the police playing much of a role in this. A big thing that's often left out is the role of the police themselves in the prostitution industry. The fact that it's illegal in many places makes it useful as a system of payoffs to the police. In the U.S. at times that has been through street prostitutes paying off street cops, and brothel owners contributing to police funds via bail bondsmen working as middlemen. At any rate, this sort of thing seems more suited towards social campaigns than coercive police action from governments.
All this discussion is about is who controls the means of production in an industry, it's the same conversation we have about any other kind of work people do. Do the workers own and run the factory themselves democratically and share the profits equally, or do they have a boss who owns the factory and exploits and coerces them and keeps all the profits for himself? Do the whores sell sex and divide the money between them, or does a pimp employ the whores and exploit and coerce them and keep all the profits for himself? This conversation isn't about sex at all.
>>2519907>Statistics in a country that criminalizes prostitutionVery nice, now let's see the Danish statistics shall we?
Besides my argument was never that prostitutes do not get murdered, or sex workers aren't more likely to be murdered. Just that bodily harm, threats and murder aren't unique to sex work. And it also varies wildly. I can't for example find out when the last Danish prostitute was murdered.
It also still doesn't answer the central question: Why single out sex work? Why not logging? Commercial fishing? Metallurgy? Or Roofers?
The question again is not whether 'socialism' should have socialist brothers and pimps. It's the obsession with sex and sex work in itself.
And what are you proposing in the meantime? Keeping prostitution illegal in most places? When this associated with higher incidences of rape, abuse and murder? As opposed to countries like Denmark and Cuba where prostitution is regulated?
I also get the feeling one argument is going to be something along the lines of people not needing sex work. But the same can be said for hotels, restaurants, cars, manufactured children's toys and other services, products and industries.
You're not willing to confront your own moralizing of sex work. And you (not just you mind) are deflecting either by accusing me of being a fascist, a pedo, or a prostitution addict, or bringing up the dangers (female) prostitutes are exposed to in places where prostitution is criminalized.
It's all so tiresome.
>>2519914No, you see, according to the moralists, the problem is having sex transactionally. Because no one has ever done that willingly ever. Because women are helpless muffins that could never realize their own worth for their own gain. Because women are children, and that's rape. Case closed. Pimps? Economics? Nah, we're huffing that good idealism stuff. We are here to announce that prostitution is over, as it has been for some hundred years since the Protestant reformation when it was criminalized. Let us celebrate doing absolutely fucking nothing!
>>2519917>>Statistics in a country that criminalizes prostitutionWE'VE ALREADY SPOKE ABOUT THIS - READ THE THREADalso:
>New Zealand and Australia and found exploitation to be rife, with legalisation acting to empower brothel owners. In one Las Vegas brothel, women weren’t allowed out unaccompanied or without their manager’s permission. In a German brothel, women had to service six men a day at the minimum rate just to make back the room rent. In a New Zealand brothel, women said men could simply complain to the manager and get their money back, leaving them with nothing.
>Decriminalisation increases the overall extent of prostitution in a country without decreasing its harms or delivering any of the promised benefits of regulation. In New Zealand, Bindel revealed there were only 11 brothel health and safety inspections over a 12-year period. And decriminalisation makes it even harder for the police to combat trafficking; Spanish police describe how difficult it is to investigate when they enter a brothel and clearly frightened and distressed young women tell them they are working there by choice.
>Decriminalisation can’t make prostitution safe because it is inherently dangerous and exploitative. How is a woman selling sex supposed to maintain safe boundaries or withdraw consent when a man physically capable of killing her is hurting her?Disingenuous fascist scum. the day you hang will be a good one.
>>2519906You're making it sound even better.
>>2519935Congratulations you made a point that has already been addressed here:
>>2519254
>To confuse autonomy from a boss with autonomy from capital is to miss the point: capital is not simply the wage relation in its factory form, but the total social relation that structures survival. Marx was clear that the lumpenproletariat, including those operating through illicit or stigmatized economies, are not outside capital but subordinated to it in distorted form. Their work does not abolish exploitation; it recirculates value through shadow markets, intermediaries, and now platform capital itself.Why don't you read the thread?
Lol, we have uyghas like those idiots here:
>>2519914>>2519917That haven't read the thread and are making points that have already been adressed and debunked. Comedy.
>>2519940Abolishing the boss is the necessary step to abolishing wage labor. This is like crying that former slaves now had to work for a wage. Yes, that's what progress looks like, stupid.
>>2519940>>2519941Because the thread is just repeating the same argument over and over again and derailing into sex and morality and long-winded unreadable rambling rebuttals and I'm trying to be the voice of reason in a world gone mad.
>>2519921>Violent fantasies about killing peopleSo when are you going to kill known bourgeois pedophiles? What's stopping you? Prince Andrew has a name and address you know. As do the other rich men who hung around with Epstein.
You're still not answering the question btw. The fact prostitutes continue to be harmed illegally is not dissimilar to other industries. In Bangladesh hundreds of garment workers have died, suffocating or burning to death, because their employers illegally locked them in, or due to lack of emergency exits and other safety measures. But I don't see this resulting in calls to abolish the entire industry.
But I think we both know why you don't want to answer. You're not looking to protect sex workers, you're looking for moral (superego) excuses and obscene enjoyment. Under communism when the proper natural moral order has been restored, you will be permitted to hunt down 'sexual degenerates' and 'fascists' (people who criticize your worldview).
It does beg the question why you're not willing to go full vigilante now.
>>2519948>The fact prostitutes continue to be harmed illegally is not dissimilar to other industries. In Bangladesh hundreds of garment workers have died, suffocating or burning to death, because their employers illegally locked them in, or due to lack of emergency exits and other safety measures.It's interesting you point this out because this was literally one of the rallying cries of Marx and Engels: workplace safety. Imagine one of these moralists going up to them and being like "NO, YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND, WE HAVE TO ABOLISH THE WORKPLACE, TALKING ABOUT SAFETY IS LEGITIMIZING IT" while coal-burning workers in England, simultaneously in real-time, are literally poisoning their lungs to an early retirement.
>>2519791>You know full well that even in places also rife with male (including child) prostitution (Afghanistan, Pakistan, South East Asia, Russia and Ukraine in the 1990s), the focus remains on female prostitution. Probably because female prostitutes made up the majority of prostitutes in those places as well.
>>2519862>>guys, what if the problem with prostitution are the pimps-><SO YOU WANNA RAPE CHILDREN HUH??>how many layers of ideology are we on here>>2519913>Not sure what to think about this subject, but if you're going to try and eliminate prostitution, it seems better to go after third-party organizers of prostitution, and people who abduct or traffic women and children, since having the police go around arresting these exploited people seems like creating further injury. Everyone with a brain knows pimps (and johns) are the problem. How, exactly, you seek to solve the problem by legalizing their activities (which has been shown, every time, to lead to further exploitation) remains unclear.
>>2519946The thread is repeating itself because bad faith actors like you keep conveniently ignoring all the empirical evidence provided by the anti side will trying to inject false allegations of moralisms as strawmen into the debat. Nothing reasonable about your hysterical display of idiocy.
>>2519950>"NO, YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND, WE HAVE TO ABOLISH THE WORKPLACE, TALKING ABOUT SAFETY IS LEGITIMIZING ITI believe this and say this.
>>2519941The closest to an answer I've gotten so far has been some spiel about how (mostly) in places where prostitution is illegal, prostitutes experience rape and abuse. And that even in places where it is decriminalized or regulated, some sex workers continue to face abuse. Which no shit, fits the same pattern as other industries where employers skirt labor and safety regulations.
But none of that answers why it's singled out. But I guess to some moral self-righteousness and denouncing your opponents as child raping perverse sex addicted degenerate fascists is more important than actually engaging with the central critique.
Which was never that prostitution and sex work isn't or can't be dangerous or exploitative, or that it should exist under communism. But that it's an object of obsession that the reasons for it are not tied to the fact other lines of works aren't dangerous or prone to abuse, but notions of sexual purity, proper sexual behavior, sex/gender relations and 'clean' versus 'unclean' labor inherited from patriarchal slave and feudal modes of production. Which I believe was also raised by Engels in his writings. The advent of and dominance of capitalism and capitalist (social) relations of production, has not completely gotten rid of the moral attitudes and ethical ideas of preceding modes of production.
>>2519951>and johnsIronically, the most dangerous Johns are precisely the ones antisocial enough to engage in something illegal. See Dubai "Porta Potties" (UAE being as you know a place where things like prostitution are EXTREMELY illegal).
>>2519953Same really. But I'm not going to oppose workplace safety regulations or unions pushing for them, even when it concerns sex work. I'm also not going to single out sex work as uniquely bad, or pretend that 'under socialism' we will have socialist wage labor, including paid socialist nurses and socialist teachers, and socialist factory workers making socialist funkopops, to be sold in socialist stores for socialist money. But not socialist prostitutes working in socialist brothels because that's uniquely icky and wrong or something.
>>2519953You can believe it and say it all you want, those English coal-burning workers need to feed themselves and their families, they're not going to give up working just like that. But, they might go on strike to not poison their lungs while they're trying to make ends meet.
>>2519960Do you think those men will stop having sex with prostitutes if prostitution is legalized? No, instead all their activities will be accepted and all the wannabe rapists who were too scared to do it when it was illegal will join in.
>>2519972>Do you think those men will stop having sex with prostitutes if prostitution is legalized?They will all probably go straight to your mom's house.
>>2519972No, you're assuming the only thing that changes are the words on paper, and everything stays the same structurally. If prostitutes have the power, they can seek to improve their working conditions, meaning conditions where violent clients are mercilessly weeded out.
>>2519978It being illegalized helps to weed them out. Every piece of evidence (which you seem to have completely ignored in order to keep defending your precious rape industry) shows that legalization only increases the rape, abuse, and trafficking of women.
>>2519978 (me)
"Have the power" doesn't mean "it's now legal". Rather, it means:
-No PIMPS
-Being able to stick together without worrying about COPS
-Forcing JOHNS to sign contracts (for example)
And so on.
>>2519983In the magical world of liberals, there are only two states of existence: legal and illegal. Enforcement, power, structure, what's that? Nah, let me huff that good idealism shit.
>>2519955Yet another attempt of injecting moralism into the debate by bringing up sexual purity despite no one arguing as such. Yet another attempt at vulgar Marxism by going full 'it's all just capitalism bro, stop thinking about it' . Yet another attempt of completely ignoring all the empirical evidence provided of legalization having an adverse effect in total terms. Recognizing that certain industries are more dangerous than others are more exploitative than others isn't fucking moralism. Marx himself wrote and singled out certain industries throughout Kapital EXTENSIVELY. I can't bear reading anymore of this junk by self-declared leftist freaks who crash out the moment you want to take away their treats.
>>2519988Yes we get it, you love cops.
>>2519990Bro, is that sentence you just wrote even legal? Have you checked, bro? Broooooo
>>2519991There have quite literally been like three different empirical studies posted throughout this thread showing that, one even looked at the development prostitution legislation in 150 countries that showed the substitution effect through legalization is inferior to the increased demand by scaling and induction of prostitution as a service but go off king, keep ignoring the evidence.
>>2519991It has been posted again and again in the thread, but I guess reading a few paragraphs is just too much work for you to do. I suspect no matter how many ways it's proven you will never accept the facts of reality, because the thought of your rape industry being a bad thing is simply too much for you handle.
>>2519995One has at one point just accept that the pro-sex work side has been completely bamboozled by propaganda perpetuated by the corporate sex industry. The sexual emancipation movement has obviously and increasingly infiltrated by porn/cam sites and other forms of sex work service providers that openly sponsor things like lgbt events. I fucking love pink capitalism.
>>2519994Woman wont report a rape case, because they know their line of work and morel likely to not report is out of fear of the cops and said vialoater.
You're a god damn liar and fucking narc. Fuck outta here.
>>2519986>-Forcing JOHNS to sign contracts (for example)A contract isn't going to stop a john raping and stabbing prostitutes to death anon.
>>2519991>There absolutely no evince of this an your just making shit up.<i can't read.Please go somewhere else to pretend to be retarded. thanks.
>>2519999>A contract isn't going to stop a john raping and stabbing prostitutes to death anon.What do you think is the purpose of contracts?
>>2519997Cool story bro. Mind sharing your study and proof that links your point to the wider legalization/criminalization debate? Does your retard brain realize that human trafficking is still illegal under legalized prostitution, as well as the wider pool of illicit and undocumented workers that still work illegally just under the cover and white-washing of legalization the same way legal ivory is used to obscure the illegally obtained ivory. It's like you are not able to understand human language or something, jesus.
>>2520002>legalized prostitution,There are only about 15 counties with legal prostitution, my guy. More often than not, those women get bamboozled with a better job/speech, only to find out it's forced prostitution. Does it exist? Yes, but like this specific case. This legal prostitution is limited in legality and not fully accepted. Shit will slip through the cracks.
If anyone isn't interested in the reading the whole thread here is the summary:
Anti-work side arguments so far:
-Empirical studies have shown that legalization is not really an effective harm mitigation measure, across numerous countries steps towards legalization have resulted in an increase of trafficking for example.
-Sex-work is a dangerous profession. Recognizing this is not moralism. Marx himself singled out certain professions and industry sectors for being especially harmful.
Pro-sex work side arguments:
-If you oppose the legalization of sex work you are inherently just a moralizing prude.
-We just need more cops on the street to keep the pimps in check and it will be fine.
-Prostitutes should all just become petty booge entrepreneurs, this is a valid step towards the abolition of wage labor relations.
>>2520005It's almost like if a group of willing people (not even necessarily cops, literally any group of people, community policing is a thing) decided to monitor brothels, there would be no Romanian women being pimped under the threat of having their passports withheld or something…
Kind of a crazy thing i read + can't stop thinking about:
>In Cambodia, I had arranged to meet a group of women who were members of the sex workers’ union in Phnom Penh, which had been founded by the WNU. The WNU, which has received funding by the Open Society Foundation , a philanthropic organisation committed to building democratic societies , came out of the Womyn’s Agenda for Change (WAC). Their activities in the first year of operation (2003-2004) included WNU and WAC hosting a visit by two representatives of the International Network of Sex Workers. Two members of the WNU secretariat participated in a ‘sex workers’ rights’ conference in Hong Kong on 1 May 2004 and two ‘sex workers’ were sponsored to participate in a UN conference on AIDS in Thailand. So the WAC (also funded by Open Society) had a clear pro-prostitution agenda from the very beginning.
>Our meeting was scheduled for 8am and it had been decided that I would take with me a translator from another Cambodian women’s NGO. On arrival at the venue, we were surprised to find that one of the board members of WNU had also decided to attend. I had received an email from her a few days before I arrived in Cambodia, asking me to submit my questions in advance so that she could reassure the women that my research would be beneficial to them. I did so, including several questions about police corruption and brutality. I assumed, on seeing the board member, who was not herself in prostitution, that she was doing some kind of ‘gatekeeping’ on behalf of the women.
>However, all became clear when the women arrived, having been ‘working’ all night. They were warm, open and desperate to tell their stories of the daily violence and abuse they endure from sex buyers, and how much they hated selling sex for a living. They talked over each other, ignoring my questions to start with and simply offloading about how terrible their lives were. The board member would interrupt them regularly and often spoke for them. I asked: “What are the benefits of being in the Union?” and was answered not by the women, but by the board member. She spoke solidly for five minutes about the benefits for members: for example, if the women are beaten by the police, they are given legal training on their rights; if they are arrested, the WNU will provide food during the time they cannot work; and if one of the women dies, they will help to buy the coffin. Knowing their rights ‘empowered them’, I was told.
>The prostituted women sitting cross-legged on the floor near me looked anything but empowered. Two had babies with them, both born of sex buyers. Another was pregnant with a buyer’s child. At least one was HIV positive. All had been raped on multiple occasions. Each one told me they could get out of prostitution if only they had $200 to buy formal identification papers, because this was the only way to secure legitimate employment such as in the service industry or a factory. When I asked if the WNU could help them do this there was silence.
>In the meantime, WNU representatives claim they have 6,500 Cambodian ‘sex workers’ on their books, all fighting for ‘sex workers’ rights’. None of the women, the translator told me, used the term ‘sex work’ to describe what they do, or ‘sex worker’ to describe who they are. This language was used by the WNU. One of WNU’s aims is “to challenge the rhetoric around sex work, particularly that concerned with the anti-trafficking movement and the ‘rehabilitation’ of sex workers”. All of the women asked where they could get help to escape the hell they were in. And while they endure this, the WNU board members and paid staff travel the region, speaking at ‘sex workers’ rights’ conferences, distorting the voices of the exploited women.
>The women I met in Cambodia would really benefit from linking up with the survivor led abolitionist movement. Every single word said by these women made clear to me how much they hated prostitution. They were openly begging for alternatives, only to be talked over by the coordinator. The coordinator told me that she had been at a regional conference, with other ‘sex workers’ rights’ activists. She told me that she had 50,000 ‘sex workers’ in Cambodia signed up to this so-called union. The women I spoke to did not know that they were ‘sex workers’ rights’ activists.
>The experience of these women had been colonised. They were being used by this NGO to promote the idea that legalisation would somehow be of benefit to them. The horrific tales the women told me about the violence perpetrated upon them by sex buyers stay with me to this day. But all the coordinator could speak about was the abuse and exploitation the women suffered at the hands of the male police force. There is no doubt that the police treat women in prostitution appallingly in Cambodia, as they do elsewhere. There is also no doubt that decriminalising the women selling sex would help immeasurably. But the coordinator was not interested in the stories the women had to tell of the everyday abuse within prostitution, perpetrated by pimps and punters. It was blatantly obvious that this did not suit her narrative.
>The women had been up all night, being used and abused for enough money to be able to afford food to feed their dependents. They clearly had no idea what a survivor movement would be like. They had no concept of political activism that would put their experiences at the forefront, and that would respect their lived reality. The difference between them continuing to be abused on the streets of Phnom Penh, or in the provinces, was not just the $200 that they would need for identity papers that would allow them to apply for jobs. The biggest barrier was the NGO that was supposed to be helping them. This NGO considered the concept of ‘sex workers’ rights’ to be above and beyond the importance of the lives of the women themselves. I asked the board member if they were planning on raising the money to help the women out of prostitution. She told me ‘no’.
>>2520005>Ah yes, the very specific case of only 15 countries that have collectively like 250 million people and around 1 to 1.5 million individuals that have engaged in sex work. Let's not take any spurious conclusions from sampled societies this small!This has to either be a fucking joke or the most obvious bad faith attempt of handwaving the most damning empirical evidence ever. Holy. fuck.
>>2520007>-Prostitutes should all just become petty booge entrepreneurs, this is a valid step towards the abolition of wage labor relations.Yes, women becoming autonomous agents aka "girlbossing", after millennia of being financially controlled and infantilized, is progress. Deal with it.
>>2520012Damn, really opened my eyes there. I always thought that the proletarianization of the petty booge was a required step towards but TIL! If we all become sex work entrepreneurs on onlyfans, capitalism will be beat! Let's go girls!!!
I think I should only fap to drawn porn from now on and continue to not have sex.
>>2520011Uh, huh. Sure buddy. Just because its legal it doesn't mean there will be many bad actors. It will need to be heavily monitored by government interference, and even then legal or non legal, they are both equally susceptible for corruption and exploitation. If done right and heavily monitored, such cases would be minimal if not, none-existent.
>>2520010There was a major protest in Mexico in the 1920s sparked by striking prostitutes. Interesting to read about.
>“Let the social revolution begin. Let the world tremble. Let the skies collapse. Let humankind shudder. Let Niagara Falls fall. Let the seas rise. Let the drainage system break down. Let electricity fail. Let the streetcars cease. Let automobiles blow up. Let the planet be razed. But don’t leave us without justice", urged Herón Proal at a demonstration on 27 February 1922, in Veracruz.
>Days later, on 6 March, the “whore sisters”, as Proal called the group of sex workers known as Las Horizontales de Guerrero, which in English translates as “The Horizontal Women from Guerrero State”, burned the chairs, beds, and mattresses on which they worked, as a form of protest against soaring rents. During those days, protesting became common in the port of Veracruz, where almost half of the population took to the streets to denounce abuse by landlords. They rented rooms of a mere two-by-two meters in tenements that sometimes squeezed more than 100 or 150 homes into a building that had only one or two bathrooms, conditions that were considered unhealthy.https://www.rosalux.de/en/news/id/46046/100-years-after-the-mexican-tenants-strike-its-spectre-still-haunts >>2520019>Uh, huh. Sure buddy. Just because its legal it doesn't mean there will be many bad actorsExcept, sorry pal, it indeed does mean that and we have the empirical evidence showing just that. So no, unless you are able to provide actual evidence to the contrary, which I am completely open to, instead of putting your dogmatic believes on repeat, you are not going to convince me. Sorry!
>>2520024There is no evidence because governments and most of the general public oppose it and won't want to try to fix this age old issue. So they make it illegal, just so they won't have to deal with it, just like any other problems governments can't solve. It is still considered taboo by today's standards. The point I am trying to make is that we can make this better for these women. I am at least proposing solutions other than just saying "HURRR DURR, lets not make it legal because of human traffiking" Like I stated before, people will fine a loop hole and trying to game or corrupt the said law in place.
>>2520016Moralizers have no critical thinking, do they. Marx predicted a future where the petty-bourgeoisie, for starters, ceased to exist, and the world was split into worker vs capitalist. That future never came to pass, today, the petty-bourgeoisie is larger than ever, small businesses in the US for example account for nearly HALF of the GDP.
The other thing is, nobody here, no serious communist, gives a shit about your personal gripes with the self-employed. As we live in capitalism, self-employment is rationally a common desire. My sister wants to become self-employed? Good for her. GOOD for HER. I will say this as a communist; no contradictions. Because I have critical thinking. You don't. Too bad!
>>2520028You are not proposing shit. You are making a bunch of baseless claims that go against all the evidence we have so far and not providing any proof whatsoever. You have bought into a bunch of dogmatic believes that you are not able to shake despite proven wrong already. You understand that this is quite literally the medical definition of delusion? Yes?
>>2520028I repeat, can you please go somewhere else to pretend to be retarded. Thanks.
>>2520034Big oufff, stopped reading half-way. Just because a company puts a label on a worker as 'subcontractor' or fictional business as a type of a social contribution and tax evasion scheme who has de facto still a employee-employer in all but in name then that worker still is a fucking worker and not a 'small business'. Total useless junk post again, as expected from pro-sex work drones.
>>2520043Jesse, what the fuck are you talking about?
>>2520047Is this another troll attempt? Or are you actually serious? Are you actually ignorant about the fact that the number of 'small businesses' in American labor an economic statistics is inflated by corporations forcing their actual employees into declaring themselves freelancers, small businesses and subcontractors?
>>2520055Subcontractors like, Indian IT and Balkan graphic designers? Granted, I am not American, but where I live, such subcontractors are not counted as small business (there is a "test" you must take for starting and maintaining small business status, depending on a single client for income eliminates you automatically)
>>2520035I have. see here →>>2519904
>Moralizers It's not even moralizing anything is doing the right thing. Just like paying workers and living wage jackass.
>>2520071protecting and giving them a living wage. Granted is a perfect world this would be true. All your suggesting to keep the status quo.
>>2520070The funfact here is that this shit is supposed to exist as well but in practice any employer is able to declare their employees to be subcontracting businesses.
>>2520071All that shit exists in my country in one way or another and applied in the real world it has caused an explosion of human trafficking the likes you which you have never seen. If you make ivory legal you are not mitigating the ivory trade, you are just allowing pouchers to launder their illegal ivory in the mass of legalized one while inducing demand that vastly overwhelms the substitution effect of the legal ivory and this has been proven already with regards to prostitution. It boggles my mind that you are unable and unwilling to understand basic facts.
>>2520072The status quo in my country is legalized prostitution with exploding human trafficking rates.
>>2520089I dont live in your fucking country, and even then its legal while being privatize. What country are you suggesting?
>>2520085I mean, is that not the job of the IRS? Tax fraud? Burgers on the internet joke all the time that you can't run from the IRS.
>>2520094Exactly, so you don't even know what the fuck you are talking about because in my case I know it first-hand and because I am well-read and educated on this issue while you are neither of those two things.
>>2520100That's right keep dodging my questions and refute to tell me were you are from because I'm a fucking mind reader.
I have very severe doubts reading a lot of this thread that any of the (potentially well meaning) pro-prostitution people who are not simply johns live in a comfortable bubble and have never ever seriously interacted with the most dispossessed in our society, the homeless, mentally ill, drug addicted and so on whom end up in the prostitution market, it feels as if they're just regurgitating things they've heard the NGO-Complex tell them.
>>2520089>>2520100Think you're probs being trolled. Maybe he is actually both functionally retarded but also arrogant enough to not understand his vast intelligence deficit but in in that case you may as well just treat him as a troll for all purposes.
>>2520112There's a lot of same fagging going around. So I doubt it.
>>2518547What does home ownership rate have to do with it?
>>2520112I've interacted with lumpen (i.e. the poor-poor and working class delinquents), well not just interacted, I lived around them. Not prostitutes though, but I've known a not-small number of men that have bought sex and admitted to it (one group of boys in middle school unironically all took turns with an escort they found online in their hotel room on a school trip in a foreign country right under the nose of their homeroom teacher who was apparently literally the next door over, I wasn't there but had the story confirmed by multiple witnesses). I also live near a university where it's an open secret that female students sleep with male professors to get better scores. I also live in a country where it is common knowledge, in no small part thanks to the nosy tabloids, that many of our domestic female celebrities that aren't married literally sleep for money with rich domestic athletes and the like (the so-called "jet set" lifestyle). I also grew up in a household where I heard my father asking my mother for sex and I could tell from the tone of her voice that she wasn't in the mood but did it anyway. I also have a sister who through an unlikely chain of events ended up sleeping with the son of an obscenely wealthy foreign family that based on the awkward photos she showed me, I can guess, she was hoping some of that wealth would "trickle down", it didn't pan out, but she did get to experience the ultra-luxury lifestyle for a few days, so fair's fair, I suppose.
What I'm saying is, I'm familiar with the reality of women using sex for benefits. I'd argue anyone who isn't familiar with that reality is the sheltered one.
>>2520152i've never had sex or seen it before but i am told that the best part of sex is when the cum comes out
>>2520152Yes exactly anon, none of those situations are particularly even remotely comparable to the situations your average prostitute tends to find themselves in, you know, without a home, a severe untreated mental disorder, PTSD and and severe addictions to alcohol/IV heroin/crack.
>>2520152>I've interacted with lumpen (i.e. the poor-poor and working class delinquents), well not just interacted, I lived around them. Not prostitutes though,This is the exact moment where I stopped reading this post.
>>2520169And the point of OP is that it's not the activity that is the issue, rather fairly concrete things.
>>2520016Onlyfans owns the means of production. Therefore e-thotting is not petty-bourgeois.
>>2520118The bourgeois family is predicated on small homeowners investing in real-estate, it doesn't survive when everybody rents and domestic labor can be industrialised. We need shit like laundromats, cheap diners and so on. YMCA type shit. You can only have that if you get rid of all the small investors in real estate.
>>2520191"Friends". I'm an autismo. I don't get along with people who don't care for "polite society" manners (to put it mildly). I lived around them because that's what the neighborhood was like. You are a LARPer who hasn't read a single line of Marx talking about the lumpen.
>>2520112I know people who have done sex work both camming and actual sex, I've met a former pimp (who in great detailed talked about pimping 14 year old girls), I even know a girl who was sexually abused at age 13, became pregnant at age 15, and turned to prostitution at age 16. And that's not even the most fucked up case. (Like one dude who got into camming as a young teen, and talked about how is mother used to sexually abuse him as a kid) I was once raped (and also beaten up the same day). I've met murderers, I've met actual child rapists. I've had friends who were homeless, and have experienced homelessness myself. I've also been in relations (and also known more than a few friends) with people heavily addicted to alcohol and/or drugs. Including one who would start his day with vodka at ~9 AM in the morning. And once threatened to stab me to death in drunken rage. Hell I'm a former alcoholic myself.
I've also lived in bad neighborhoods. I once lived in an apartment with no heating in winter (in a place where temperatures can easily hit -20 C), no gas for cooking (landlord couldn't be bothered to have it connected after asking numerous times, same with the wifi), and water leaking down the ceiling in my bedroom.
Hell, I've had to sleep with strangers up to six in a room, two of which were alcoholics not including myself, in a cold filthy home, where the floor boards were flaking and warped from stale piss and you had to avoid stepping in dog and cat shit because one person kept half a dozen untrained cats and dogs in the house.
I once called myself lucky when I found enough change to buy a single bread and this was all I had to eat for a few days. I've had to steal so I wouldn't starve. I know what it is like to be detained and the panic when cops showed up at my door. I know what it's like to dread all my stuff getting wet because I couldn't find a proper place to sleep for the night and it was fucking pouring and I was also expected to be back at work the same morning. I also know what it's like to have people close to me suddenly disappear because they were tossed into prison.
I'm not "pro-prostitution" I just find the moralizing fucking ridiculous.
>>2520202Cry me a fucking river.
>>2519989>Yet another attempt at vulgar Marxism by going full 'it's all just capitalism broBut that's the thing. It is. That's the horror. Sex work is simply work, maybe dangerous work, maybe work most consider gross, but it's just work.
>more dangerous>more exploitativeCompared to what? Picking fruits without protective gear whilst people are spraying banned pesticides all around you? Working in construction until your back and knees fail and you can't walk without pain and have trouble standing up or bending forward? Some kid working in a barely mechanized illegal coal mine somewhere in Pakistan?
It's all dangerous, degrading and alienating. And for some of us, who now suffer lifelong disabilities because of work, who have experienced poverty and homelessness and desperation, who even know what it is like to suck a dick of someone you don't fancy because you need a place to stay for the night or pay for dinner, we just have no patience for this romanticizing of non-sex work. This stupid distinction between "noble" and "degrading" work with the only metric being the fact some are uncomfortable being confronted with sex, or people not treating sex (including virginity) as this special sacred thing, unlike everything else that was formerly intimate and domestic that's been commodified, commercialized and institutionalized.
It's the last refuge of cowards who are okay with selling and degrading everything else, but not sex.
>>2520202>traumatized moron who lived through hell wants to keep things hell-like because he's become numb to it and thinks it's normalyeah yeah we know
this is just more proof your opinion is worthless. you have never lived a normal life and thus are unable to conceptualize of a society without rapists, homeless, prostitutes, druggies, etc. lurking around every corner.
any socialism you imagine is tainted by all the shit you went through, so just leave the thinking to us instead thanks.
>>2520223Its a coping mechanism. Like how people see clean streets that aren't crowded, have no advertisements and very low noise in DPRK videos and say "THIS IS SOOOO CREEPY. POOR NORTH KOREANS!"
When your whole life is constant noise, ads, crowds & filth, a sane society looks completely alien, if not actively vile.
>>2520219The moralizing surrounding prostitution reminds me of the reactions to teen mothers killing their babies I've read online. People calling them monsters and all kinds of stuff. They never take a step back and consider the circumstances that would lead a teenage girl to do that. And how future tragedies could be prevented. I've argued with some of these people. Thick skulls. It starts and ends at the baby killing, for them. I've read in the US they now have safe places where those girls can anonymously leave the babies (though unfortunately the mothers are still branded criminals). That's a positive step forward, I wish the rest of the world would catch up.
>>2519986>Sign contractsYou dense motherfucker.
The primary argument against sex work is completely independent of how "cushy" the workplace is. You can execute all pimps and have the sex workers walk around with private guards, and it still wouldn't change this fact:
engaging in sexual acts as wage labour under threat of poverty is rape.
If your landlord asks you to have sex with him in exchange for rent (or send him nudes, or whatever), we have no trouble recognizing this as rape.
> But it's okay if you're instead made to have sex with dozens of other anonymous men to pay your landlordThis is
NOT an argument from prudishness. In fact, one can hold this view, and also enjoy orgies and sex parties and posting ass and fucking strangers - _as long as it's not done under threat of poverty_
>>2520312and exactly what is better about standard jobs? plenty of them are horrific or terrible
>>2520312>If your landlord asks you to have sex with him in exchange for rent (or send him nudes, or whatever), we have no trouble recognizing this as rape.Would "we" call it rape if the woman initiates it? Like in those old-ish porn movies where a handyman finishes fixing the thing and the woman goes "I'm short on cash, can we have sex instead?". I mean I have no clue how common that is in real life, but that doesn't matter, since we're talking about landlord rape hypotheticals anyway.
>>2520318Not much!
Wage labour itself is immoral broadly, but sex work is uniquely bad because having sex with people you don't actually want to is traumatizing
>>2520321>but sex work is uniquely bad because having sex with people you don't actually want to is traumatizingso is being working in a mine for barely anything, so is working in a sweatshop, so is doing extremely harsh agricultural labor
>>2520319Yes. If she's having sex with someone because she's afraid she'll be evicted otherwise, this is rape.
This isn't merely about semantics. The key point is to recognize that
she's going to feel violated >>2520324Yeah those things suck. That's the fucking point.
Are you pro-sweatshop?
>>2520319>Would "we" call it rape if the woman initiates itYESImagine needing to ask this.
>>2520330the point is that this hyperfocusing on an exploitative industry is just moralism, not an actual fair evaluation
>>2520333<you can't ever talk about anything specific because that would by hyper-focusingFUCK. OFF. You're too dumb.
>>2520333Extremely Israeli rhetoric
Please face the wall
>>2520327Let's say I accept your conclusion that doing something under threat of poverty is exploitative.
This is still not intrinsic to trading sex. It's literally the typical wage laborer's situation in Marx's time. Your "violation" thesis, in an attempt to differentiate the two, hinges on moralism. Let me put it this way. I am a neurodivergent retard. Put me in the situation of a typical wage laborer in Marx's time, and chances are, I suicide. By this reasoning, is my experience the same as your hypothetical tenant woman's "violation"?
>>2520334what's exactly the point of going "this is LITERALLY the worst thing in existence, we need to ban it NOW" and then getting mad that i'm calling you out for hyperfocusing on this specific exploitative profession, it is quite literally no worse than the average manual labor, yet i'm expected to believe this is "uniquely exploitative" or some other bullshit because… you have sex with people you don't want? is a postman being superexploited by being forced to deliver packages to random people's doors?
>>2520336Is the life quality of an average prostitute today better than a mill worker's 200 years ago? Probably. That's largeley a function of things unrelated to the actual labour, though. What about a Victorian-era mill worker vs a Victorian-era prostitute?
Your point does illustrate the problem with person-focused analogies. As a retard, perhaps you personally would suffer much greater anguish toiling at a London textile factory. Likewise, there are certainly some women who would not feel particularly bothered if they were able to avoid eviction by fucking their landlord.
These individual exceptions don't negate the over-arching trend: the majority of people who have sex under threat of poverty would rather escape the threat by some other means
>>2520352Literally yes. For the vast majority of people, being forced to have sex with people you don't want is 1000x worse than being forced to walk around delivering packages all day.
>>2520345>Anti-capitalism is when you don't use money!!Meds, now
You motherfuckers expect me to believe all types of wage labour are equally unpleasant? That someone who sucks smelly senile dick for a living has it equally bad as a frycook?
We don't let people buy/sell kidneys, and we shouldn't let people buy/sell sex
>>2520361In bartering you don't use money dumb-ass.
>>2520370some are more unpleasant than others, but moralizing about them is a problem, and moralizing about how fucked up and terrible it is that people have to perform sex acts for money when there are far more horrific jobs is a real unique form of neurosis
>>2520361>Literally yes. For the vast majority of people, being forced to have sex with people you don't want is 1000x worse than being forced to walk around delivering packages all day. More importantly it's many times more dangerous and damaging. People don't tend to come out of a delivery job with PTSD and multiple rapes.
>>2520385No one disagrees that cobalt miners in Angola are incredibly immiserated and exploited. However, you will NEVER be able to show me "pro-cobalt-mining" tiktoks and instagram pages.
In stark comparison, there is a psyop campaign to "normalize sex work", backed with deep pockets and turbo libs. It's
critical that we emphasize how terrible sex work is, because unlike coal mining, people are trying to convince everyone that it's actually totally OK
> Your job is to willingly engage in something that Israelis subject their prisoners to
It is pure insanity to handwave the empirical fact that engaging in prostitution statiscally reduces your life expectancy by a huge margin, greatly improves your risk of violent crime, increases the risk of overdose or being a homicide victim by a factor of like 13x as a moralist hyperfocus and then say someone ignorant and pit it against something like 'well, uh, working in a mine is dangerous too, it's not the same as sucking a few dicks, it can't be helped.'
>>2520395This guy gets it.
>>2520395I think coal mining is ok with proper safety equipment and procedures.
why don't more prostitutes act as dominatrices though. like there's way more money to be had in telling bitchass beta boys to pay up than subbing to a guy who won't pay anyway.
>>2520370Also people who say "oh every type of work is humiliating" or "some people like to have sex" don't understand that 99% of women would only prostitute themselves as a last resort because it's the most humiliating thing one can do. The fact that johns have to pay for the intercourse means that under normal circumstances no sane woman would have sex with random men to the degree that prostitution is making up for the lack of supply in the dating/hookup market or wherever people look for sexual satisfaction. People having to humiliate themselves in an extreme fashion just to survive is a typical characteristic of a stratified class society.
Sex work is deemed as illegal since it's basically reproductive labor, care work. As such traditional economics see it as outside the economy, sex like childcare, housework and emotional labor should be done for free, not only because they are femme coded tasks, but also because reproductive labor cannot be exploited to the extent production of commodities can. Don't get me wrong, pimping can be cruel and abusive, but there's no real depersonalised alienated commodity produced, since the pussy is basically attached to the laborer. There's no world where you can go to the sex store and buy one sex choosing between several worldwide brands of sex. Sex work is abhorred under capitalism for same reason traditional slavery is, it is too personal.
After abolishing gender we will have government supplemented orgies, so no need for prostitution exists in post-capitalist world.
>>2520704Another proof that liberal feminism is nothing but a justification for late stage capitalist societal degeneration and the suffering of declassed proletarians . Mf is really arguing that prostitution is preferable to being a housewife. The American left went from demanding that black people in '50s should be allowed to live like white people to everyone should be forced to live like black people in the '50s, or based on where things are going and the shit you are saying black people before the Civil War.
Because this website is filled to the brim with /pol/-tier incels who will never ever be capable to handle a woman's touch without freaking out.
>>2520752>>2520814(me)See what I mean? Undiluted incellery
Prostitution is paid rape.
>>2520752Being a prostitute and being a housewife is in similar category of exploitation, I did not express any preference.
>>2520850>Being a prostitute and being a housewife is in similar category of exploitationTrvthnvq. I recently saw a tradcath type talking about the marital obligation of regular sex, while his wife sat next to him, looking like she was about to cry.
>>2520395You also don't see "pro-miner anti-mining". The sex industry is uniquely moralized, which is disproportional to the people employed in it, or the harm caused to those engaged in sex work, or the wider (environmental) impact. How many of you are arguing it should simply be made safer? If sex work can be safe what's the issue?
>hurr payment is not consent and sex without consent is rapeAnd other bodily harm isn't? Why the fuck are you people drawing the line at "penis in the vagina" or penetration in general or jacking off a dude, but not all the other harmful shit workers are forced to do the world over because we have no choice and would otherwise starve?
>>2520688I'm probably one of the few perhaps the only poster ITT who knows what it's like to do sexual favors in return for money/shelter. Not enough that I'd call myself a "former sex worker", but I know the drill. Yes it's unpleasant, but so is cleaning skidmarks out of filthy public toilets, or cleaning up pallets filled with rotten food the manager from the previous day couldn't be bothered to toss away before closing even after it had been sitting in an un air conditioned warehouse in hot summer weather for days.
And that doesn't cover nurses having to remove semen encrusted catheters from dementia patients, or adult diapers.
I can tell you that the smell of a pallet filled with broken rotting egg cartons made me gag more than sucking a dick did just so I could stay in a filthy ravished apartment with two alcoholics for a few more days. And camming for ~50 dollars (which the asshole technically owed me and never ended up paying) felt less degrading than dealing with obnoxious, rude customers who would threaten and insult me. Hell one of my co-workers at the time had to clean up a toilet covered in liquid shit. But I guess that's not 'degrading' because it's not 'public' the way a sex worker is advertising her services.
>>2520223>>2520850Also this. These people would probably be horrified to learn how "trad waifus" are treated outside of their little bubbles. Of women confessing their boyfriends force them to have sex whenever they feel like it. Or a woman I was once involved with telling me she had never had a guy ask her what she actually wanted. Or guys openly admitting to fucking passed out drunk women, including their sleeping girlfriends ("you just stick it in").
Goes to show the kind of sheltered 'middle class' bubble they live in.
It's all part of a wider issue. Of people fantasizing about a "less degenerate" capitalism and pretending it's communism.
The 'anti' crowd are okay with banning it and pretending it doesn't exist. As if that changes anything. For example, the girl I mentioned who became a (child) prostitute at age 16? It happened in a place where prostitution is illegal. It makes no fucking difference. Men still used and abused her. And she sadly wasn't the only one. Local cops btw were also in on drug dealing.
These people want a "socialism" of PMCs and students from clean pretty neighborhoods raised by parents who work "respectable" jobs, who smell nice, who have a full set of teeth, and don't dress in ill-fitting or tattered clothes and mismatched outfits.
Under """Communism""" we'll still poison ourselves producing slop destined for the landfills, ruin our backs and knees, and clean up shit and piss in public toilets and nursing homes. But that's okay, because we'll remain invisible.
It's all okay as long as the world pretends there's still something sacred and untouchable. And God's still out there. Everything is up for sale, everything is free to be degraded, privatized, commercialized, commodified and institutionalized. But not sex. Oh no, not the sex! That's special - unlike everything else.
You people would recoil when confronted with the lives of the actual working poor and lumpen. You don't want "socialism", you simply want to ethically consoom your "socialist commodities" in peace, and not be reminded of all the filth and sickness in the world.
>>2520251genuinely how is this possible? do you never socialise? never go outside? do you have friends?
>>2520901You're asking him like he's the only man in the history of mankind that never got laid when we know that, if I recall correctly, about 60% of men that have ever lived are "missing" from the modern human genome (the so-called Y chromosome bottleneck).
>>2520896I get what you're saying, but realistically speaking, isn't it better for there to be a lot more friction for people to engage in prostitution, gambling or hard drugs, than working a regular shitty job? I do see people going on a moral crusade against these doing so for ideological reasons, yet neither do i think legalizing sex work would help anyone. Call me out if simply trying to reduce the number of people working in prostitution is an illusory position, no one with a smidgen of political power genuinely supports.
>>2520903Answering the proportion of people who die virgins:
>the answer is approximately <0.3% for females, and <1.2% for males in the US, discounting infant mortality which the other posters have covered well, and discounting same-sex contact which I really have no time to model given the data. This has to be mostly young deaths, and freaks.
>>2520905There is no equivalent X chromosome bottleneck, which there would be if it was just infant mortality.
For those unaware, the way it works, fathers pass on their Y chromosome to their sons, and those sons pass on the exact same Y chromosome, and so on. Right now, I possess the same Y chromosome that some man had 200,000 years ago.
60% of Y chromosomes are simply gone. Extinct.
>>2520904>isn't it better for there to be a lot more friction for people to engage in prostitution, gambling or hard drugs, than working a regular shitty job? The girl I mentioned grew up essentially raised by no one. Excepting maybe her grandmother who she lived with a few years. Her mother is an alcoholic who now lives with my equally alcoholic and also gambling addicted ex who regularly beats her, doesn't do shit in the house, barely pays for anything, and basically rapes her whenever he feels like it (like when he gets home drunk 4 AM in the morning).
Her mother is also too busy raising her two year old grandson (the daughter's kid). Last I heard her bio dad is in prison for failing to pay alimony and also gang raping another woman back in 2023. Said bio dad is also the man her mother left at one point middle of the night because he beat her up one time too many. She has basically no one, no role models, no 'community' to take care of her. Her brother is serving in the military. I'm not even sure where she is at the moment, because she has a tendency to simply disappear for weeks, in-between all the truancy.
I can't do anything as I live very far away. She also got arrested in 2023 for selling drugs with a friend of hers. But was released because she was a minor. Her mother has basically no more contact with her other family members. And one of her brothers is in prison too.
This is not a failure of not banning prostitution, it's a social failure. No safety nets, no one who gives a fuck, no one watching her be it relatives or authorities (school, etc.). My ex is also a psycho who once tried to strangle her.
I have many more fucked up stories of people who ended up like that. Including from the village where I grew up. It's the general erosion of community life, the decline of the multi-generational family, existential emptiness and lack better opportunities which causes this.
You don't fix this with criminalization, you fix it with socialization. Now there are definitely entire industries which I think should be banned and cracked down upon; gambling being one. But you don't 'save' girls like that by tossing them in prison and ruining their lives even more. You instead need to create spaces where girls like her can flee to and where they're protected from men (including family members) who abuse them.
There's even an article posted ITT talking about how this existed back medieval times.
>>2519447 >>2520910Yeah, precisely. The problems of girls and women forced into prostitution are way deeper than merely being forced into prostitution. If you could wave a wand and make prostitution disappear… this does nothing to change the living situations of these girls and women. Poor. Abusive family (or no family at all). Neighbors that don't care. Et cetera.
>>2520904>yet neither do i think legalizing sex work would help anyoneNot giving cops license to persecute prostitutes would actually help them greatly.
The fact that these conversations 999 times out of 1000 are male-dominated discussions focused exclusively on female prostitution kind of says it all
>>2520901I'm not that anon but yes it's possible. I'm older than him and never even been on a date. In my particular case the things you listed are true. I never really go out and after covid much less than before which wasn't much anyways. I don't socialise much even though I have a job I just try to go through the night with as little contact as possible and I'm generally looking down or away from people also since afternoon and nights I don't have a whole of contact with others. Some people do try to converse with me and I try my best but I just can't muster much interest and try to move on as fast as I can. And I don't really have friends have never really had much friends and if I do get friendly with people I don't really maintain relations for long plus sometimes people just get annoying to me. Generally I prefer being alone and as much as I want to socialise and have sex it feels overwhelming to try so it feels best not to.
>>2521003The fact that a conversation on a male-dominated space is male-dominated, and that a discussion about a profession that is 90% female is centered around female practicioners, really don't say that much, smartass
>>2520971I did. What point are you trying to make? Are you referring to post about how legalised prostitution makes it harder to combat illegal trafficking? Yeah, I suppose not being able to just throw people in jail on a whim would make it harder to enforce the law.
>USA goverment goes full on fascist
>american lefties: this is the moment to think about le ethics of onlyfans
>>2521017Oh noes, they are
thinking? That shouldnt be allowed.
>>2521027I was just thinking about the artist who did this illustration yesterday. I wonder how they're doing
>>2521025yapping aint thinking
>>2521017You're assuming I'm American
>>2521118Thats what fascist will do so yeah better wise up.
>>2521101Sorry, I assume everyone on this website is american until proven innocent.
>>2521147based on what? Being an idiot?
If you cannot comprehend why putting a price tag on human flesh is problematic, you're beyond hope. Prostitution in all of its forms is utterly destructive and contemptuous of the most basic conditions life requires. Congratulations on finding a way to be more disgusting than any capitalist ever could be.
This shit by the way was inherent to Marxism from its inception. If you need an excuse to prevent something that is obviously monstrous in of itself, yet always have enthusiasm for letting it go on "by nature" it says everything that is needed about you and your cause. Eventually, whatever excuses a Marxist makes, they will come to the sad conclusion that their theory of human society requires this to go on, and can't fathom anything else existing. The most a Marxist could do is reject their own theory of human society and thus the Marxist method altogether, and that was always the point, wasn't it? To promote this idea of endless criticism except of that which will actually rule, while the suckers are made to struggle over nothing.
There really is nothing different in humanity, but that's because of what humans are. Humans can choose something outside of humanity that is greater than this shitshow that they have been up to now. As soon as any of us do that, the screeching begins and retards like this recapitulate the greatest of human ugliness and cruelty. Fags, fags, fags.
>no one has posted it yet
disappointing.
>>2522023Very funny but I'm not seeing anyone here seriously argue for communist brothels.
The issue is why the line is drawn at sex work. Arguing for workplace safety in sweatshops churning out fast fashion or factories producing consumerist slop is okay, but not when it comes to sex workers. I've even raised examples which imo I think are a lot more degrading and harmful than being a high end escort. Stating certain types of work will simply not be pursued and won't need to banned is likewise acknowledged. Except for sex work.
>>2522031Man you just don't get it.
>Putting a price tag on human fleshIs already the standard. Capital disciplines bodies and time. Even emotional expression. And people only find the fact this also applies to sex work uniquely icky because of inherited moral attitudes from previous modes of production and the fact they cannot accept there truly is nothing sacred and pure left in the world. As well clinging to notions that there is 'degrading' and honorable work. Which is a psychological cope at best, elitist at worst.
All is fine as long as sex remains the last imagined refuge. Even in a world already rife with prostitution (including child sexual exploitation).
I'm not proposing instituting sex work under socialism. I'm telling people to open their eyes and realize sex has already been degraded, privatized, demystified, commercialized, commodified and institutionalized. And I'm asking you all why, out of all activities, everything that was previously sacred, intimate and private, it's sex being treated in this manner that causes all this moral outrage and anguish.
One of the silliest notions for example is that sex work would need to be banned at all "under socialism". If you already believe in doing away with capital and wage labor, and genuinely believe no woman (because again the primary focus here is on female prostitution) would choose to 'sell her body' under communism, then why ban it at all?
I'm accused of being incapable of imagining a different world because of what I've experienced
>>2520223 by people who cannot imagine a world where even if prostitution isn't banned, no one would consider pursuing it.
And why is that? Because to many ITT "communism" is capitalism without "degeneracy". And stating you do not engage in 'unethical consumption' is a form of virtue signalling. E.g. yea maybe you bought a gadget that was partially the product of slave labor, maybe you unwittingly bought a shirt made by some Bangladeshi garment worker, maybe the avocado you ate came from some cartel owned plantation in Mexico, but at least you haven't fingered a stripper, right!?
>>2518525North Korea is a fascist monarchy, not socialist.
>>2520223Shut the fuck up
>>2522059The entire point of fighting capitalism is that you wouldn't be treated like that. If your revolutionary slogan is to maximize that and naturalize it, you are so abominable that the workers would agree to any slavery that allows them to retain "liberal normalcy".
This if you haven't figured it out has been the Fabian strategy for the past 100 years or so; to make extraordinary threats against the person and then insist on an eternal retreat to institutions that were captured from the outset.
>>2520752> The American left went from demanding that black people in '50s should be allowed to live like white people to everyone should be forced to live like black people in the '50s, or based on where things are going and the shit you are saying black people before the Civil War.Yes. The proletariat of the Black nation attempting to assimilate into the labor aristocracy and bourgeois norms has been an absolute disaster.
>>2522063Wrong. North Korea is Communist. There is no monarchy
>>2522063I mean North Korea was brought up because of the "they're not Degenerate Like The Rest" shit (I literally saw an anon ITT spouting that reactionary talk unironically). They have illegal flea/farmer's markets (what's that, things being exchanged in spite of it being illegal?). They had a famine in the 90s (what do a not-insignificant women end up doing worldwide when times are tough?). And, if a defector guard is to be believed, they have "geisha" girls (my words not his, also not literal geisha but the Western stereotype of the fancy Asian prostitute that pretends she's not a prostitute, just an "entertainer", because of cultural norms or something). I mean, you put two and two together, of course North Korea has it, every single country does.
>>2522673> And, if a defector guard is to be believedI love how you are aware that these people bullshit enough that you had to say this but left the nonsense claim in anyway to bolster your point.
Least dishonest leftypol debatefag.
>>2522730Yes, academics do this all the time. You should re-check your definition of "dishonest" (dishonest would be not putting up disclaimers for data that isn't considered conclusive).
>>2523129>that isn't considered conclusivewhat a weasley way of describing defector tales.
>>2522673If it exists at all in the DPRK, its incredibly marginal and would have peaked during a faze of hardship like the arduous march (which doesn't help your point actually, since it highlights its at keast product of terrible circumstances). If only I could find the video of Cao de Benos confirming its marginality & harsh illegality.
Indeed a broader point can ve made,: All AES banned prostitution and it was so marginal that if you asked people about it they all figured if it existed at all it was state security using entrapment on foreigners and dissidents. Reference:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cho33eVLoog (And incidentally, he is right to highly the frankly bizarre obsession the west has with sex compared to the rest of the world, whether in its past religious form or especially in its current degenerate form)
But no nirvana fallacy from me: I am happy with significant reduction if strict abolition cannot be achieved.
>>2523169Lmao you are delusional
>>2523164What is "weasley" about saying one man's testimony isn't conclusive evidence?
>>2523169>highlights its at keast product of terrible circumstancesNot the point at all. The point is that exchanging sex is present everywhere, including where it's illegal, including "Not Degenerate Like The Rest" North Korea. Evidently it is a phenomenon wholly divorced from culture ("degeneracy"), as labor and breathing air are.
>>2522059>"You say you like eating apples, why do you hate oranges? Why do you hate people who oike oranges?">"Nobody would ever murder somebody else so why do we need laws to prosecute people for murdering somebody?">>2523223>"Spiders live literally everywhere so why do you try to keep out of your house? Just let them in."Is this the best pro-prostitution debatebros can do? Also I like how you shifted the focus from prostitution to "sex work". Definitely not something a sophist would do.
>>2523427>shifted the focusThis is literally what the thread is about. Read the OP uygha
>>2523546Everyone recognised 'Sex Work' is a useless NGO term that's unnecessarily wide and vague and we moved on to talking about specifically prostitution.
>>2523548>we moved on to talking about specifically prostitutionYou mean prostitution in general or street walkers specifically?
>>2523548"Sex Work" is never used in the OP. Try again.
>>2523223Nobody is claiming its somehow divorced from society or does not exist despite illegality. Red Herring.
Disease, killings, hunger, even human filth like yourself exist everywhere. And yet societies can and do put in effort into reducing these ills.
The point is to make efforts in this direction, ideally through a comprehensive transformation of the mode of production & social relations more broadly.
>>2523548okay but sex work is a real thing, not some "ngo term" (?) but it isn't even used in the OP, so why are you even asking about it
>>2523758Uh-huh. I'd like fully automated gay space communism where nobody has to ever lift their ass to exist, too. Doesn't answer the question of why are you moralizing prostitution, though.
>>2523764Again nirvana fallacy.
The USSR did make strides in centralized economic planning, radical increases in production, reductions in economic inequalities, etc.
That it did not achieve communism does not mean it improvement is necessarily impossible or undesirable.
The real issue is not that the proponents of prostitution do not have some moral/ethical elements that underpin their position; Rather its likely that they ones that diverge fundamentally from those of us that oppose prostitution.
Between opposing views of this kind, force will decide. Force is indeed a key element in part of the means to combats prostitution in practice:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12404012/kim-jong-un-executions-firing-squad-sex-uni-students/ >>2524234Enrich themselves to what end? What exactly do you suppose the ruling family lacks?
>>2524234what kind of crack are you smoking?
>>2523782>moral/ethical elementNo, the whole point of OP is that it's not a moral issue. But you continue to moralize it, rather than recognizing it is not different from other economic activity under capitalism.
>nirvana fallacyThere is no nirvana fallacy, the nirvana fallacy is pretending the status quo of illegal prostitution is fine and there is nothing more that can be done while marginalized girls and women continue to be pimped. The very social contract of capitalism is the promise of freedom to seek obtaining capital for oneself. Pimping, like slavery, is thus in the context of capitalism literal robbery of the people affected, robbed of the possibility of seeking to obtain capital at all. Hence, it is quite justified to be pissed at pimps and slavers on a social scale, just as it is quite justified to be pissed at unemployment, working hours, etc. However, it does not follow that it is justified to be pissed at wage labor or selling sex, when that is not in the slightest in contradiction with the social contract of capitalism, it is a "fact of life", just as pre-modern slavery and serfdom was a "fact of life" (I cannot speak for the future i.e. socialism/communism, because I am not a utopian). Lenin's "if you do not work, you do not eat" applies in every era so far, the only thing changing are the circumstances of the "work" (enslaved, working to return debt, selling one's work).
You are under the illusion that politics is only possible by being mad at the snake for biting your leg. On the contrary, the only thing that politics requires is what you're going to do about the bitten leg.
>>2524261>Enrich themselves to what end? What exactly do you suppose the ruling family lacks?Oh come on, when has physical want ever stopped actual monarchs and fascists?
>>2519951>Everyone with a brain knows pimps (and johns) are the problem. How, exactly, you seek to solve the problem by legalizing their activities (which has been shown, every time, to lead to further exploitation) remains unclear.I was watching some of the New York mayoral debate, and Curtis Sliwa went on a tear about why the police need to crack down on prostitution, but even he was like, arresting the prostitutes is completely wrong because they're exploited, trafficked women. Instead, he wants to make an example out of the pimps, madames, and johns. I haven't read the rest of the thread but if there's anybody here who is arguing for arresting prostitutes, they're well to the right of a right-wing vigilante guy who dresses like a 1920s squadristi.
>>2518511Prostitution just doesn't appear in a healthy society. What else is there to discuss? It's not like communists executed prostitutes or didn't try to give them productive jobs and good lives.
I feel like this topic specifically is the closest to right-wing "all feelings, no facts" mode of discussion, it's just attention-seeking idiots who find a topic a group of people feels irrationally strongly about and gets at best 300 replies, at worst 2.5 million views.
>There is literally nothing wrong with sex as transaction.
It is wage labor, so it's bad. That's the communist analysis.
>>2524471Moralizing wage labor is not "communist analysis". See
>>2519950 >>2524514>>2519950You people are aware that coal mining and coal-based energy has completely ceased to exist in the UK in favor of renewable energy, yes?
Prostitution is paid rape.
>>2524570What century do you think anon was referring to?
>>2524597Mischaracterizing valid critiques of the legality of sex work due to the inherent dangers in this industry is obviously a reference to the current industry because you know, sex work is still legal in many parts of this globe.
>>2520901Not sure why people are surprised this happens
Lots of men fail in life
>>2524574>>2520817As opposed to selling and wearing down your body in another line of work?
>>2523427>"You say you like eating apples, why do you hate oranges? Why do you hate people who oike oranges?"What are you talking about?
And assuming that nobody would murder each other, at least for reasons of material deprivation or the kind of sexual pathologies surrounding patriarchy is entirely reasonable. Ever heard of the Mosou in China?
What would people even prostitute themselves for? Labor vouchers? Barter? Climbing the social hierarchy?
Why don't the people arguing "prostitution should be banned under socialism" (but somehow not most others lines of work) admit you believe in some nebulous human nature, that murder and rape and prostitution and commodity production and exchange are simply "inherent" to the human condition?
>>2524604Coal mining still exists in other parts of the world.
>>2523758>even human filth like yourself exist everywhereYou people really get high off your own moral superiority don't you? Nothing like the catharsis of persecuting the evil Heretic. For asking the obscene question why out of all types of work, all the exploitation in the world, all the disciplining of time, labor, bodies and emotions, of all the previously intimate, private and domestic forms of labor now commodified, commercialized, franchised and institutionalized - it is
sex that triggers this level of moral outrage (and in particularly women "selling their bodies", as opposed to selling their bodies in any other industry).
>>2524652Because hetmoids?
>>2524604Anon was talking about Marx and Engels's time. Hence "walking up to them".
>no one has posted it yet
disappointing.
>>2524925Do you also know why that was? The fact her parents were impoverished, and her deadbeat gambling dad? And how afterwards she was ferried to Korea to live with family who exploited her as a servant instead?
Do you also know that after the 1956 law was passed banning prostitution, it continued anyway?
Yes I know, I'm very "sick" and "obscene" for questioning how moralized this topic is. And I'm sure you're ecstatic if not outright aroused at your pearl clutching and sense of moral righteousness by denouncing people like me for daring to bring it up.
>>2524990>Do you also know why that was? The fact her parents were impoverished, and her deadbeat gambling dad? And how afterwards she was ferried to Korea to live with family who exploited her as a servant instead?Wow, so she was coerced by poverty and abuse into prostitution? I was skeptical before, but hearing about how women get forced into prostitution by poverty really convinced me that it's a good thing!
>Do you also know that after the 1956 law was passed banning prostitution, it continued anyway? Did you know that people still produce and distribute child pornography even though it's illegal? Maybe we should legalize that too, so that all the children can have better working conditions and more pay. After all, it's not like it's different from any other kind of labor, you moralist!
>>2525020> Maybe we should legalize that too, so that all the children can have better working conditions and more pay. I give it like… a decade, for minor's "modeling" to go full circle back to mainstream acceptance and the discussing of "nymphet" young celebrities and idols in the anglosphere. Both sexes and a plethora of genders and sexual tastes now, however!
And like, another decade at most, before underage (with parent's consent, ofc!) softcore porn is just "controversial" but otherwise accepted and semi-legal.
>>2525020CSAM and child labor is different. I wouldn't support kids working in coal mines either, and sexual attraction to children is a largely a patriarchal sexual pathology itself. There is no reciprocity here, the child is desired because they're dependent on and less likely to reject the groomer compared to an adult. The issue with CSAM and child prostitution then is the values and ethics espoused by adults pursuing it. And not simply the act itself. And yes, some of these attitudes can be shared by (mostly) men pursuing prostitutes, though not exclusively.
Distributing the nudes of children also violates their privacy. And imo children should be allowed to live private lives without any part of it being published publicly, including on social media by their own parents, so they can orient themselves in the world without immediately being judged or feeling burdened. They're not fully "people" in the sense they're not fully or sufficiently aware of the world they live in and are compromised in their ability to both consent and be morally culpable. Similar to people with advanced dementia, or certain neurological conditions.
I don't know where precisely the line should be drawn or if it should be the same for everyone. But I do believe a line should be drawn somewhere.
What's the actual solution to stopping child labor and sexual exploitation? The same as preventing prostitution; social support and alternatives (schooling, or at least ensuring parents and caretakers can support them and remain present in their daily lives, and safety nets in case they're being abused) whilst cracking down on abusers. (which in case of adult prostitution is johns and pimps forcing their own SOs or vulnerable people into prostitution).
But if you're okay with adult wage labor, as long as it 'has' to exist in some capacity for the time being, then why specifically single out and moralize sex work? Kaneko Fumiko was almost sold into prostitution by her mother. And it wouldn't be much better if she had been forced into it by a husband of boyfriend.
But that's different from if she, as an adult woman had 'chosen' it (as far as work and jobs is a "choice" under capitalism) You can argue that selling one's body is uniquely vile, but all work involves selling one's body in some way. You can also argue the men who pursue prostitutes are vile, and that their "consumption" of sexual services is less ethical than other forms of consumption. But that still doesn't change how all adult wage labor disciplines bodies, time, emotions and even where one can live.
The kneejerk reactions here is in part because people can't answer it (beyond vague statements that paid sex is rape), or won't because it ties into (inherited) sexual pathologies and notions of honorable and degrading labor. Some of the opposition here to simply regulating it for example is tied to people obviously viewing sex as degrading in itself (or as long as a woman is on the "receiving" end), or uniquely so compared other lines of work (nursing, sanitation, waste and janitorial work).
>>2525026Parents pushing their kids into modelling is child abuse.
>And like, another decade at most, before underage (with parent's consent, ofc!) softcore porn is just "controversial" but otherwise accepted and semi-legal.I think we're way past "peak nonce" aka 1970s. I just don't see the infamous petitions and "sexuality research" making a comeback anytime soon.
>>2525023I'm not the one denouncing others as sick, sex and prostitution addicted, child fucking degenerates. When religious preachers and pearl clutching "conservatives" behave in this manner, it's obvious why they're doing it. No different here really.
>>2525038>sexual attraction to children is a largely a patriarchal sexual pathology itselfAnd prostitution isn't a product of patriarchy???
>the child is desired because they're dependent on and less likely to reject the groomer compared to an adultWhy, exactly, do you think people have sex with prostitutes? Because the prostitute
is dependent on having sex with johns to survive. They cannot say no, that's the whole point, because the alternative is poverty.
>The issue with CSAM and child prostitution then is the values and ethics espoused by adults pursuing it. And not simply the act itself. And yes, some of these attitudes can be shared by (mostly) men pursuing prostitutes, though not exclusively.<The difference between these two things is this quality which I admit they have in common>Distributing the nudes of children also violates their privacy.And women aren't having anything violated by being forced to have sex?
>What's the actual solution to stopping child labor and sexual exploitation? The same as preventing prostitution; social support and alternatives (schooling, or at least ensuring parents and caretakers can support them and remain present in their daily lives, and safety nets in case they're being abused) whilst cracking down on abusers. (which in case of adult prostitution is johns and pimps forcing their own SOs or vulnerable people into prostitution).Oh, so you'll just get rid of the pimps and johns by legalizing their activities?
By the way, child labor
is illegal. That's why it doesn't happen so much anymore. If it wasn't, people would still be pulling their kids out of school in 7th grade and having them go work in a factory to support their families.
>But if you're okay with adult wage labor, as long as it 'has' to exist in some capacity for the time being, then why specifically single out and moralize sex work?Because, as has been shown many times in this thread, it is one of the single most harmful forms of labor. Of course, it's probably too much to ask for you to read a few paragraphs that might harm your justification for supporting your precious rape industry.
>The kneejerk reactions here is in part because people can't answer it (beyond vague statements that paid sex is rape)This has been explained to you in a number of posts in this thread. Apparently you have decided to ignore all of them.
And this whole discussion is why I mostly jerk my chicken to my collection of cartoon porn of anthropormorphic animals.
>>2525053I've met (Solo) prostitutes and sex workers who did not rely on pimps to 'protect' them.
But you're again focused on the sex, and not answering what makes 'sex' uniquely different from other forms of selling one's body.
And whilst much of prostitution is tied into patriarchy, both in what causes women to be forced into it, and why men pursue it. (For example in Kaneko Fumiko's cage she ended in that situation in part because children born out of wedlock couldn't be properly registered) But there's also male prostitution. And men pursuing prostitutes out of loneliness or social isolation. It's not exclusively down to a desire to dominate the prostitute.
Many places in the world also continue to have child labor even though it's illegal. And in some where it is legal under specific circumstances, not every child engages in it. For primarily economic reasons. It's something very few children pursue unless their parents or circumstances force them into it.
I've also not ignored the arguments raised, but I've raised additional ones. Women the world over are also forced into other types of jobs in order to support themselves, their children or their (deadbeat) husbands/boyfriends. I've also repeatedly raised the question, why should 'sex' remain sacred, compared to all the other forms of previously domestic labor?
You argue it's uniquely harmful, again compared to what? Is being a high end escort as dangerous as working in construction? Logging? In sanitation or a steel mill? Not every prostitute dies in their line of work. I raised Denmark before where I can't even find the last time a prostitute has been killed.
So if this model can be adopted, proves effective, why would you continue to oppose it? And if you're gonna argue it should still be banned and prosecuted regardless (as opposed to simply becoming obsolete and irrelevant) then why raise the safety argument?
All the "Prostitution isn't a big deal, bro, just legalize it and it'll naturally disappear somehow" fags should be gay cum dumps in seedy night clubs.
>>2525075>But you're again focused on the sex, and not answering what makes 'sex' uniquely different from other forms of selling one's body.Because it typically causes more harm than other forms of selling one's body. Do you also think that there's no difference between rape and any other kind of assault?
>But there's also male prostitutionMale prostitution is a small fraction of total prostitution, but it is not a good thing for men to be raped either! (Incidentally, only a small fraction of the people buying sex from male prostitutes are women).
>And men pursuing prostitutes out of loneliness or social isolation.Being lonely doesn't make rape OK, actually.
>Many places in the world also continue to have child labor even though it's illegal. And in some where it is legal under specific circumstances, not every child engages in it.So is your argument that since a much smaller number of children still engage in child labor despite it being banned, we should just give up on preventing it altogether, and since it some children don't engage in child labor, child labor isn't really all that bad?
>It's something very few children pursue unless their parents or circumstances force them into it. Incidentally, prostitution is something very few women pursue unless forced into it as well.
>I've also not ignored the arguments raisedCould've fooled me, because you've spent days whining that there's no difference between prostitution and other forms of labor despite the statistics, studies, etc posted ITT that all show that it
is more harmful than almost any other kind of labor.
>Women the world over are also forced into other types of jobs in order to support themselves, their children or their (deadbeat) husbands/boyfriendsThis is not a good thing, but as I have said previously, prostitution is objectively worse.
>I've also repeatedly raised the question, why should 'sex' remain sacred, compared to all the other forms of previously domestic labor? See above. All of these arguments have been answered before.
>You argue it's uniquely harmful, again compared to what? Is being a high end escort as dangerous as working in construction? Logging? In sanitation or a steel mill? Not every prostitute dies in their line of work.Yes, actually. Prostitutes have lower life expectancies, are more likely to be injured, and it has far worse impacts on their mental health - which are all things you would already know if you had actually
read the things posted before in this thread.
>I raised Denmark before where I can't even find the last time a prostitute has been killedIf you want to use that statistic: Sweden has banned prostitution under the Nordic model since 1999. Germany has had legal prostitution since 2002. From 1999-2015, Sweden has had one (1) murder related to prostitution. In Germany, from 2002-2015, there were 69 murders by pimps and johns. In Spain, where prostitution is legal, the five years from 2010 to 2015 saw 31 murders.
>So if this model can be adopted, proves effective, why would you continue to oppose it? The reason Denmark has so few murders related to prostitution is that it is a tiny country and thus has very few murders. Legally speaking, its policies on prostitution are similar to those of other European states where it is legalized and where I found statistics available it appeared to have similar problems to other countries with legal prostitution (ex. rates of sex trafficking).
>And if you're gonna argue it should still be banned and prosecuted regardless (as opposed to simply becoming obsolete and irrelevant) then why raise the safety argument?Because banning prostitution has been objectively shown to massively reduce the harm caused to women by prostitution.
>>2525147>The reason Denmark has so few murders related to prostitution is that it is a tiny country and thus has very few murders. Yes but also, at least how i always attributed it, Denmark brought in comprehensive policies to aid in addiction, homelessness and mental health. It dealt with the core problems that lead people to be on the street.
>>2525147The Danish population is 6 million, Sweden is ~10 million. Both have next to no murders of prostitutes. Sweden also doesn't ban prostitution completely, it bans procuring it. Women are still free to pursue it. Both undermine the argument that it is inherently dangerous and lethal.
You mention Spain, but Spain also has ~700-800 workplace deaths a year. Spain also had ~300 homicides in 2020. Compared to 6.2 murders among prostitutes (your data) a year from 2010-2015.
The population of Spain is also ~5 times that of Sweden.
Many other lines of work also have lower life expectancies or lower qualities of life in old age. For example roofing, construction, logging, fishing and long haul truck driving.
>>2525168You still haven't explained how prostitution will disappear if it's allowed to proliferate but without any hecking violent pimps or where are all the prostitutes doing it voluntarily which justifies it.
>>2525168>Many other lines of work also have lower life expectancies or lower qualities of life in old age. For example roofing, construction, logging, fishing and long haul truck driving.The difference here is that prostitution is not only objectively worse than those occupations (I also said this in my last post, which you apparently didn't read) and provides no benefit to society.
>Spain also had ~300 homicides in 2020. Compared to 6.2 murders among prostitutes (your data) a year from 2010-2015. >The population of Spain is also ~5 times that of Sweden.So, Spain had a rate of prostitution-related murders…about a hundred times higher than Sweden (0.06/year vs 6/year) without even adjusting for population. By the way, Spain has an average murder rate of 0.7/1000 while Sweden's is 1.14/1000 - so Sweden has a higher murder rate than Spain in the first place.
>Sweden also doesn't ban prostitution completely, it bans procuring it. Women are still free to pursue it.This is a total misunderstanding of how Sweden's laws on prostitution work. Prohibiting anyone from buying sex (while providing resources to help prostitutes escape prostitution)
is banning prostitution. No one in this thread is saying that prostitutes are guilty of anything or should be arrested (although the supporters of prostitution seem to have ignored that and claimed it anyways). When we talk about banning prostitution we mean getting rid of pimps and johns, not attacking the victims.
>[Denmark has] next to no murders of prostitutes.Is this a case of there being no murders or is this a case of there being no reporting on those murders?
>>2525186Because eventually people will no longer need to pursue it like any job? Besides what does it say that in places like Denmark and Sweden, some women still choose prostitution over work that requires little training? It completely undermines the argument that sex work is inherently degrading or uniquely or more so compared to other work.
>>2525188It's not "objectively" or inherently worse unless you cherry pick data by picking specific countries and do not compare it to places where murders are so rare or non-existent. It's like generalizing the treatment of agricultural workers in Nicaragua as the standard everywhere, or arguing the mining industry everywhere operates under the same standards and level as safety as in the DRC.
Denmark neither bans procuring nor selling in itself. In Sweden procuring is banned but not selling. But both have had similar results.
>Is this a case of there being no murders or is this a case of there being no reporting on those murders?I've considered this too. But you can argue this in regards to all statistic including for other lines of work. If it's not reported it doesn't mean it's not happening, but it also doesn't mean it is.
>>2525211>It's not "objectively" or inherently worseNo, actually, it is objectively worse. See
>>2519119 and
>>2519281, for instance.
>cherry pick data by picking specific countries and do not compare it to places where murders are so rare or non-existentThis is nonsense. Did you not read my last post? Spain, which I compared to Sweden, has the lower overall homocide rate of the two, but the number of yearly murders of prostitutes in Spain is approximately 100 times higher than in Sweden.
>It's like generalizing the treatment of agricultural workers in Nicaragua as the standard everywhere, or arguing the mining industry everywhere operates under the same standards and level as safety as in the DRC.The statistics I have given are all for some of the most developed countries in the world. I haven't even brought up the conditions of prostitutes in the third world.
>In Sweden procuring is banned but not selling.Sweden bans prostitution. The fact that they do not arrest the victim does not change that.
>But you can argue this in regards to all statistic including for other lines of work. If it's not reported it doesn't mean it's not happening, but it also doesn't mean it is.So you have no actual proof of this. Good to know.
Where I
do have statistics, they show you to be objectively wrong.
>>2525224It's so objectively worse that there are no more reported murders of prostitutes (as opposed to other workplace accident related deaths) and women continue to choose it over alternatives?
You compare Spain to Sweden, but not Spain to Denmark because that undermines your argument. Therein lays the cherry picking. Even Sweden itself undermines the argument because regardless of procuring it being banned, women there still choose to become prostitutes.
And so the whole argument collapses because like so many industries, it is shown it can be 'safe' and preferred by some to available alternatives. Which might brush up against the idea of female prostitutes as perpetual powerless victims under all circumstances and sex as work being uniquely degrading. But that doesn't correspond with "real world" examples.
>So you have no actual proof of this.I dunno what you're referring to here, because I simply stated in response to
<Is this a case of there being no murders or is this a case of there being no reporting on those murders?That sure, that might be true, but isn't proof of anything.
Do you also agree with anti-communists when they do that thing where they point to all the "deaths under socialism" as proof "it cannot work in practice only theory!"?
>Yes anon maybe socialism can be done without killing anyone<But did you know that under Kultural Mark Stalinist China killed 100 gorillion laotian small business owners? Checkmate leftists >It's so objectively worse that there are no more reported murders of prostitutes (as opposed to other workplace accident related deaths)
This is incomprehensible, are you saying that unless the number of prostitutes murdered exceeds the number of workplace accident deaths it's fine?
>women continue to choose it over alternatives
They don't when they have any choice in it! There's a reason why the overwhelming majority of prostitutes in the west are or were homeless, it's because it's the absolute last resort, and even with the threat of poverty women still need to be trafficked into it en masse.
>You compare Spain to Sweden, but not Spain to Denmark because that undermines your argument
No, actually, it's because there's no data for Denmark for anything to be compared with it.
>Even Sweden itself undermines the argument because regardless of procuring it being banned, women there still choose to become prostitutes
Again, the few women who engage in prostitution in Sweden are forced by poverty, violence, and trafficking. This is not a thing that almost any women choses to do.
>And so the whole argument collapses because like so many industries, it is shown it can be 'safe' and preferred by some to available alternatives.
Only the opposite has been shown, that legalization only increases the abuse, violence, and trafficking of women.
> But that doesn't correspond with "real world" examples.
You haven't given any.
>That sure, that might be true, but isn't proof of anything.
There is no data, and you took that to mean that there is data which agrees with you.
>Do you also agree with anti-communists when they do that thing where they point to all the "deaths under socialism" as proof "it cannot work in practice only theory!"?
Absolute nonsense with no bearing here.
>But did you know that under Kultural Mark Stalinist China killed 100 gorillion laotian small business owners? Checkmate leftists
The reason this is wrong is because those numbers are bullshit. You haven't shown a single thing which suggests that any of the statistics I've used are inaccurate.
>>2525287>haven't given anyWe have been discussing two. Denmark and Sweden. The fact no homicides are reported among prostitutes in Denmark does not rule out there might be any unreported ones. But it's also not proof that there are unreported homicides.
If you on the other hand you do argue the latter, why not agree with anti-communists too arguing Stalin and Mao killed 60, 140, 200 million people?
>Again, the few women who engage in prostitution in Sweden are forced by poverty, violence, and trafficking. This is not a thing that almost any women choses to do.This also happens in case of other jobs. People stay for the paycheck, few would stay for the job itself.
Anyway I did some digging and found an "anti" argument that actually sounds solid
<It also makes women in prostitution conform to a specific idea of what a woman “supposed” to be like in bed. It isn’t about both people in the prostitution contract, it’s about establishing a relationship where sex is about what men want — the man is the buyer so he will get what he wants. It’s not about satisfying her. If you’re a real feminist and if you actually want women to enjoy sex, I don’t understand how you can defend an institution that is all about renouncing any kind of desire that women have and only satisfying his desires. https://www.feministcurrent.com/2014/01/20/being-and-being-bought-an-interview-with-kajsa-ekis-ekman/And it's imo a lot better than the constant "moralizing" around how degrading sex work is or how uniquely (physically) 'harmful' it is. Choice here is irrelevant because prostitution (by women) normalizes the idea sex is something a man does to a woman (either in itself or in exchange for something), and that it's all about what a man wants. It sets a bad example and normalizes patriarchal gender relations.
I can't say I disagree with that.
>>2525363Glad you found something that helped you understand the situation, but I do wish you had bothered to actually engage with my posts instead of purposefully misunderstanding me, ignoring evidence while providing none yourself, and making nonsensical arguments.
>>2525020>After all, it's not like it's different from any other kind of labor, you moralist!Yeah, you've no clue what you're talking about. Marx's opposition to child labor is fundamentally based on children being immature, hence, a vulnerable group for economic exploitation, and a literal working hazard. In matters of sex, we call this "unable to consent" and "dangerous to the child" (imagine how much pregnancy would wreck a child's body and mind, when it already wrecks enough the bodies and minds of more resilient adult women). Your reactionary "slippery slope" is a strawman of the highest order.
>>2525363>Anyway I did some digging and found an "anti" argument that actually sounds solidI can offer a counter-example: I was with an older cousin on my 18th birthday. The older cousin offered to hook me up with an escort he was acquainted with, to jack me off. When I asked my cousin, wait, what do you mean jack me off, he replied, she only does handjobs. So even this argument, that the client decides the terms, doesn't necessarily hold true.
>>2525211>some women still choose prostitution over work that requires little trainingAnd some kids choose to work in the coal mine, guess it means we need to stop cracking down on child labor and just let it peter out on its own.
>>2525785Suggesting women have the same level of intellectual agency as children is…pretty telling about your opinion of them.
Either way, what if a woman genuinely enjoys prostitution and isn't being coerced? Why is it any different from any other job?
>>2525390I still think the 'safety' argument is nonsense. If safety is the issue, why not just have "socialized" brothels?
It's very different from explaining why prostitution itself is irredeemable. (Like the author from the article I quoted)
>>2525811>Either way, what if a woman genuinely enjoys prostitution and isn't being coerced? Why is it any different from any other job?On the level of simply being a job, it's no different. But in terms of the values the job imbues, see the last paragraph of the article I linked. Entitlement to dominating women sexually, also gives way to the domination of classes.
I do disagree with the whole victimhood narrative as well as sex work being synonymous with rape, because it infantilizes women even when it comes to sex work. Also as
>>2525677 pointed out, prostitutes can set limits to what they're willing to go along with. Sure not everyone abides, but it's different from rape (you get nothing and they don't listen as opposed to prostitution as sexual exploitation).
>>2525843>Entitlement to dominating women sexually, also gives way to the domination of classes. Is this inherent to sex work? I feel like that isn't the case in other industries where workers provide a service but it depends on how society views those workers. For example, a contractor comes to your house and provides a specific service that you pay them for, and this doesn't give you social power over them because their job is seen as "skilled" work and a necessary kind of work. A retail worker is seen as expendable so people treat them like crap. But sex work is kinda inbetween, high class escorts aren't receiving the same clientele or the same abuse as streetwalkers, because they get more control over their work.
They provide a service that is, in my opinion anyway, pretty valuable to society in treating people's emotional stress. It should be treated as more akin to therapy, moved to a more professional setting where workers have rights, and empower them to ban clients who treat the women poorly. I mean, if someone goes to therapy and starts abusing the therapist they'll quickly get banned and possibly blacklisted from every clinic in the area. Why can't sex work be like that? Let them unionize and give them control over their own industry and the "entitlement" thing will solve itself.
>>2526200>They provide a service that is, in my opinion anyway, pretty valuable to society in treating people's emotional stress. It should be treated as more akin to therapy, this is bait, right?
>>2526225sexual fulfillment is unironically a core need of all humans. look how brainbroken incels have gotten. the entire modern right-wing is just composed of men that went crazy from lack of sex.
>>2526245Humans have a need to belong (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). I don't think it's as much about sex for incels as much as it is about ostracization and exclusion more broadly. Maybe they deserve that exclusion, maybe not, idc. Men are famously bad communicators and when incels identify "no pussy" as their plight, I think they're largely transferring their frustration of non-inclusion and lack of social acceptance onto women. I suspect this may be the case due to male westoid social norms that may be becoming less adaptive as things continue to change.
Incels, in my experience anyways, aren't really accepted by their fellow man either. Incels are not known for their rich and fulfilling social lives. Incels are not known for their sense of fraternity and personal warmth. Incels are known for trying to frame maladaptive coping mechanisms as "alpha".
So to wrap up here, I don't think this is as much a "need for sex" thing as much as it is a "need to belong" thing.
>>2525038>sexual attraction to children is a largely a patriarchal sexual pathology itselfTrvke. It is a product of patriarchy it is not innate or inborn or anything
Prostitutes should be sent to WORK.
>>2525046>>2525038Let me answer you, black flag trasnwahman anon. They have issue with it because every man feels entitled to non married woman. Men see all non married women as their potential partners. Thats why they are butthurt. See, a satisfying answer for a transwahman like you, its just hetmoids, blame hetmoids and patriarchy.
It's been 100 posts later and nothing substantial has been added to change the nature of this summary
>>2520007>>2526245>>2526350Most men are born to be cucks, simple as. Incels are men who couldnt ignore, that is, cope with this fact, this brvtal trvke. Most men didnt reproduce and shit.
>>2520007>oppose legalizationIt is based to oppose legalisation of le sex work. Based people are for decriminalisation, not legalisation.
Prostitutes should be send to work under dotp.
>>2520007I'm morally in favor of prostitution because I never managed to convince a woman to give me a rimjob, I only could pay whores for it.
I have a human right to get my anus licked by beautiful girls.
>>2526786Dick on the pussy?
>>2527110No, dictatorship of the pussy
>>2527111Ah! That makes sense.
>>2527110It is actually dictatorship of the penis/phallus
>>2527115That also makes sense. So which is it dictatorship of the pussy or the penis? Maybe we're transitioning from one to the other?
>>2527106Why? What kind of spook is this where it has to be a stimulation by liking by a woman specifically?
>>2527154Why dont you just rub your asshole with your fingers?
>>2527155I like it when a girl does it
>>2526200It becomes inherent because of how gendered prostitution is, and what it represents more widely.
I definitely have the same issues however with the way service workers are treated too; waiters, cashiers, etc. Where we're supposed to assume a mask of professional even when we're insulted, degraded or threatened. But that's "okay" because we're getting "paid for it". I once got a lot of shit from a manager because I let on I wasn't happy with being insulted, especially having after having slept outside the previous night. No cussing, insults or threats of violence on my part. But apparently we're supposed to tolerate anything.
Take for example the high end escort who earns thousands a week and works on a contract basis for an established agency; even if she's willingly "pretending" she's still perpetuating the fantasy that women are supposed to act like that. You pretend to enjoy sex even if you don't, you pretend to like the man, you pretend to be a couple in public, etc.
Important here is that you're not simply exchanging a "commodity". The prostitute doesn't lend her body to be "used" while mentally she's in virtual reality or something. As a cashier you register the sale and ensure the product isn't "stolen" (See Debord's take on "rioting") and so remains a commodity. A waiter delivers commodities.
Taking into account the example of the high end escort, a sex worker who operates like this ends up selling "themselves" for a period of time as opposed to other types of work where you "only" sell your labor-power (See Marx for the difference between labor and labor power). Both are forms of disciplining bodies and labor, but there is a distinction here.
>>2526783Whether prostitution is or can be safe does not answer whether prostitution should be opposed regardless.
I so want this anarchist Freudian uygha in court on a case of a child grooming ring or some such and how he'll try to bail the pedos out with brilliant arguments like "Pedophilia is mostly the fault of patriarchy" and "Kids getting diddled on camera isn't that different from them being forced to mine ore, so clearly we don't need any laws against child sexual abuse, in my utopian world it would disappear on its own".
>poor women forced into prostitution because they have no other good option for making a living
>"Clearly the solution is banning prostitution!"
what is being implied in all these posts is that sexuality is something inherently prohibited by civilization.
>>2527234>>2527219I consider myself a Freud enjoyer, but is this actually true of all civilizations and not just Western ones? Not everywhere got the Christoid brainworms like they did.
>>2527346its not the west that makes homosexuality a crime, is it?
>>2527348I dunno it sort of depends on the time. Greeks and Romans were supposedly down with it. Some western countries permit it today. It's always been controversial though and that controversy is widespread across cultures, but I think I see what you mean. But even in these cases, just because one type of sex is prohibited does not mean all sex is prohibited. It's a nitpick but I guess I might say that sex isn't prohibited by civilization, but rather regulated or managed.
>>2527346Yes, all of them, pretty much by definition.
>>2518511>There is literally nothing wrong with sex as transactionTransaction under capitalism implies coercion to be able to afford the essentials of life. So it has an aspect of being nonconsensual. What matters more is the greater social context surrounding it.
See anon's references at the bottom:
>>2519119 >>2519254Nice effort-post anon
Something people often neglect to think about is how things like rape culture and systemic misogyny affect men, all the things men see during their childhood that shape their perspective on the world and how they see women.
I think it was late middle school or early high school when I first remember hearing other kids talking about having sex, like stories of girls having sex with boys in the bathroom at school and things like that. After years of "sexual education" which was all about abstinence and shame, the reaction among students, boys and girls alike, would basically be "ew gross what a slut" rather than any concern about the fact that a 13 year old girl is already having sex with boys - we were too young and naive to understand why this kind of thing happens (the girls were sexually abused in the past by adults) all we knew is that it's considered shameful and gross on the girl's part and so we played the role we were assigned and blamed the victim.
Then towards the end of high school and the years thereafter, I got to see the whole macho culture of adolescent men/boys obsessed with sex and treating and talking about women as sexual objects, I began to witness acts of sexual harassment and sexual assault, incidents of sexual assault at school with the police involved and all the rest of it, the inevitable "she was asking for it" responses from male and female students and faculty alike, the subsequent trauma and ostracization and shaming of the victims, I think all of this stuff kind of gave me this weird distorted perspective about women, seeing them as sort of frail delicate victims in a world of predators, and it also gave me bad vibes about the whole idea of sex, I felt like sex was this inherently evil and manipulative and aggressive act and it made me afraid of sex and I didn't have sex until like age 20 or so and couldn't even cum, part of me just felt like I was doing something wrong and it took years to get over that feeling. That's just one example of how rape culture can affect men.
>>2527170Are actresses in normal movies sexually exploited? Feminists would say yes.
Does this automatically translate to movies being a backwards thing?
What you're talking about right now is "no one likes to pretend". You're dwelling on a moreso philosophical matter, than a social one: "the authentic self". Marxists would tell you there is no such thing as an "authentic self". Pure idealism. And this philosopher whose specialty is precisely this topic:
https://youtu.be/SWD03nbnlgwWill tell you, that everyone is already pretending.
>>2527584eh, the idea of sex being about men conquering and women submitting is not unique to the West, nor is it unique to this time period or to any specific culture. It's basically just how human sexuality works and I feel like trying to change it is a waste of time. There's only so much you can "teach" sexuality to people before they call you an annoying faggot and just go back to doing things how they want because it's how they've always done things.
If you want to change the way people approach sex you have to start with a culture that provides both men and women with some personal incentive to treat eachother differently, and it has to include some alternative method that is just as successful for procreating, otherwise the "male feminists" will just be outcompeted by chads who don't care about any of this shit.
I've met way too many women that basically became chuds just because they find the culture of "anti-sex feminism" to be extremely patronizing, and men who feel like they're being directly attacked for things they didn't do just because they find certain aspects of a woman attractive like being a good cook or having big tits, as if there's something wrong with what attracts humans to eachother. A lot of it comes off like "theorists" are abandoning materialism entirely and just trying to dictate to people how they should live their lives and interact with eachother just because it's more "proper" or whatever, and I think people can sense this and are understandably annoyed by it.
Same for the stigma around sex work from leftists, it feels like a lot of it is just patronizing sex workers and talking down to them like they have zero agency, and they're just supposed to sit down and let some armchair theorist take their livelihood away because "muh morality" even though you aren't providing any kind of alternative way for them to live or make ends meet. I tend to take a much more live and let live approach to sexuality, if two adults consent to enter into a sexual contract of any kind it's not really my or the state's problem unless it starts impacting birth rates or some other measure of long-term productivity. And there's basically no evidence that sex workers do that, so who cares.
When I'm in defending rape competition and my opponent is a leftist :l
>>2528053>It's basically just how human sexuality works and I feel like trying to change it is a waste of time.Well nobody even tried in my case. Like I said, the sexual education at my school basically boiled down to telling girls not to be whores and that's about it, nobody explained things like sexual abuse or how to recognize it or tell an adult about it, nobody talked about consent or rape culture or anything like that. Obviously we can't rid the world of misogyny or sexual violence but we could at least have the courage and honesty to talk about it instead of sweeping it under the rug.
>>2527211After skimming the thread, this kind of sums up my issue with how things are being framed. Is prostitution safe? In many countries, even those where it is strictly illegal, no. Will illegalizing prostitution stop prostitution or stop people in poverty from pursuing prostituion? No, and stating such would largely go against the body of work marxists tend to refer to when discussing and analyzing the consequences of poverty, such as the use and selling of drugs. I think many in this thread are doing the thing that /leftypol/ tends to do, which is to have a preexisting belief, and then justifying said belief by means of materialist-esc language. There is not a lot of clinical analysis actually going on here, and a lot of resistance and unwillingness to explore the possibility of being wrong or right. I think we're also missing out on a lot of nuance, because I don't think it's fair to compare typical street prostitution with selling merch and sex on the side (particularly in the modern day online), just as it's not fair to compare mining in the global south with mining in the first world. We have to be honest, are we discussing sex work as a whole in a nuanced way, or are we discussing sex work in hypothetical and isolated scenarios, whether they be "romantic" or cynical?
Also, to what degree are we defining sex work? If someone pays for an act, physical or otherwise, and they sexually get off on it, despite not being what we typically associate with "sex work", is it still sex work? Is sex work under threat of poverty clinically any different in terms of a strict Marxist analysis from all work under threat of poverty? To be hyperbolic, is not all work slavery just as all sex work rape? This isn't to make a "pro" argument, but I don't understand focusing energy on being "anti" sex work either, external in focus from being simply against all capitalist labour. I don't think we can have our cake and eat it to; you can't say other areas of labour can be "reformed" in terms of the safety laws surrounding it, and then isolate another area of labour to be uniquely incapable of such unless you can sufficiently prove otherwise. And as an anon earlier pointed out, we do have situations, countries, and city's which as a tendency show it to be not unique it terms of legal regulation. I think this discussion requires us to be less inflammatory, and more mature regarding the topic.
>>2528065tbh I feel as if there's just no point in fighting prostitution because humans will always exchange sex for goods and services no matter how hard you try to stop them. there's no law that will stop a tenant from exchanging sex with her landlord if she can't afford rent. there's no law that will stop a woman from marrying herself off to a rich man, effectively prostituting herself for a life of wealth. the more you try to control people's private relationships the more it will backfire on you through civil unrest.
>>2519119>Countries with legalized prostitution are associated with higher human trafficking inflows than countries where prostitution is prohibited. The scale effect of legalizing prostitution, i.e. expansion of the market, outweighs the substitution effect, where legal sex workers are favored over illegal workers. On average, countries with legalized prostitution report a greater incidence of human trafficking inflows.>Criminalization of prostitution in Sweden resulted in the shrinking of the prostitution market and the decline of human trafficking inflows. Cross-country comparisons of Sweden with Denmark (where prostitution is decriminalized) and Germany (expanded legalization of prostitution) are consistent with the quantitative analysis, showing that trafficking inflows decreased with criminalization and increased with legalization.This data is actually highly contested and is now taken as being incomplete in both its data and conclusions. What we instead see, at least in developed countries with sufficient economic stability, is a two fold process. First, decriminalization, which initially results in a moderate uptick in a given practice (gambling is used as an example) as black market agents who already have established operations take advantage of and feed into an emergent market. Then comes legislation and regulation by the state and "secondary" capitalists in the following years, which now have a vested interest in involving themselves and rooting out older black market agents. Criminal involvement decreases, and so to decreases the use of criminal networks to acquire goods or services, replaced by regulated means. By another decade, the market is integrated, and criminal activity becomes negligible as market actors becoming streamlined into a process of legal compliance to operate their business. This reflects stats in Germany, where there was an initial uptick, then a general decrease. I think the more interesting conversation is regarding labour trafficking though.
https://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/blog/21/07/2021/legalizing-prostitution-does-it-increase-or-decrease-sex-trafficking >>2528040I don't think you captured that in this specific case "pretending" becomes a social issue. I also do think fictional depictions do shape our views of the world.
>Marxists would tell you there is no such thing as an "authentic selfSocialism is something you have to choose - in the existentialist sense, not lolbert indeterminism. But on the subject of existential authenticity, considering what Marx wrote in The German Ideology:
>Further, the division of labour implies the contradiction between the interest of the separate individual or the individual family and the communal interest of all individuals who have intercourse with one another. And indeed, this communal interest does not exist merely in the imagination, as the “general interest,” but first of all in reality, as the mutual interdependence of the individuals among whom the labour is divided. And finally, the division of labour offers us the first example of how, as long as man remains in natural society, that is, as long as a cleavage exists between the particular and the common interest, as long, therefore, as activity is not voluntarily, but naturally, divided, man’s own deed becomes an alien power opposed to him, which enslaves him instead of being controlled by him. For as soon as the distribution of labour comes into being, each man has a particular, exclusive sphere of activity, which is forced upon him and from which he cannot escape. He is a hunter, a fisherman, a herdsman, or a critical critic, and must remain so if he does not want to lose his means of livelihood; while in communist society, where nobody has one exclusive sphere of activity but each can become accomplished in any branch he wishes, society regulates the general production and thus makes it possible for me to do one thing today and another tomorrow, to hunt in the morning, fish in the afternoon, rear cattle in the evening, criticise after dinner, just as I have a mind, without ever becoming hunter, fisherman, herdsman or critic. This fixation of social activity, this consolidation of what we ourselves produce into an objective power above us, growing out of our control, thwarting our expectations, bringing to naught our calculations, is one of the chief factors in historical development up till now. https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1845/german-ideology/ch01a.htm Selling your body is denigrating and dangerous, talk to actual people that do this for a living and you will see that it's plain bad and out of necessity, at least street prostitute not virtual whores on Onlyfans.
>>2528171>virtual whoresReally cant help yourself from openly spilling your sexual frustrations for a single sentence, even when you try to dress them up in "concern for victim" garb.
This discussion is always retarded first worlders or middle to upper class people mad that the work that is overwhelmingly done out of necessity or direct coercion has negative connotations.
Persecuting prostitutes obviously won't work, it is the pimps and sex rings that must be destroyed but trying to frame prostitution as "liberating" or whatever other nonsense is retarded, especially in the thirld world.
>>2528689Show me a single post in this thread framing it as liberating.
>>2528171>denigrating>it's plain bad>virtual whores>>2528689>middle to upper class>connotations>sex rings>frame prostitution as "liberating">especially in the thirld worldThis is mega moralism, pure cope and strawman, not a single argument to be found.
>>2528171this is true of literally every manual labor job and probably a lot of other jobs as well. why does 'sex' have this big glowing ring around it that separates it from other kinds of dangerous and psychologically harmful work? under capitalism all labor will be denigrating and dangerous.
>>2528708Because they're not having sex with ME!
>It probably is unironically as old as humanity itself.
It's not though. Sex "work", in the sense of buying and selling sexual services for money, is a product of class society and patriarchal private property relations.
>>2528705What is there to argue about? Being pro "sex work" is being pro rape
>>2528739Nobody here is pro sex work, people are against banning it.
Why can prostitution be "banned" but the rest of wage labor not?
>>2528740That's not what OP is about though.
>>2528740I guess I am "pro sex work" in that I know people who do sex work for a living and they enjoy their work and find it fun and creatively fulfilling and they are pretty happy well-adjusted decent people with pretty ordinary lives other than having a somewhat unusual profession. It's really not as big of a deal as normies make it out to be. You see someone having sex in a porn video and you make all these conclusions about who this person is and what their life must be like, forgetting that this person is just an actor playing a character, it's just a performance, a job. After the camera goes off and work is over, they go back to their normal life, helping their kids with their homework and shit.
One question appalled normies ask a lot about sex workers is "How do you tell your children about what you do?!?!" and the answer isn't actually that complicated - you just be honest and tell your kids that you make videos for adults that aren't appropriate for children and that's all they need to know about it, end of discussion.
>>2528946But this is not "pro" position in any meaningful way, saying that sex work is like any other job seem like completely neutral position to me.
>>2528965Well I guess my point is, if someone is voluntarily doing work they feel comfortable with and is not being exploited or abused or coerced by anyone, I don't see anything wrong with that kind of work, I'm pro sex work and pro work of any kind as long as it's a consensual and safe and fair exchange.
>>2528169>I don't think you captured that in this specific case "pretending" becomes a social issue."Pretending" is like breathing, hence in all societies, there will be "pretending". That's why it is not a social issue, that is the act in of itself. What you're made to "pretend" might be, in a particular place and particular time, harmful to you, due to social attitudes - but "pretending" itself is a neutral activity.
>I also do think fictional depictions do shape our views of the world.I don't think you understood the question. Does putting pretty women in movies, just because they're pretty, make movies *as a whole* backwards? I would say, not anymore than the existence of illustrated Nazi agitprop, makes drawing a "backwards thing".
>Marx wrote in The German IdeologyMarx is not concerned with what we're talking about (authentic self). He's concerned with the division of labor, which is only a thing because of class society. Once class society ceases to exist, that is communism, so too does the division of labor. It's strange to cite Marx in that book because the whole book is dedicated to dismantling Stirner's fetishization of the individual. For Marx, Stirner's ideology is directly the product of capitalist relations which separate humans from each other; Stirner engages in idealism, reifying his conception of the individual over the facts of real life (i.e. material conditions), that is why Marx mocks him by comparing him to a Jacobin (the nickname "Saint Max" is probably meant to allude to Louis Antoine de Saint-Just).
>>2518511>I am autistically pedanticNo, you're just autistic. Which is why you can't parse why people take umbrage with prostitution.
>>2528730Where did you see the term "sex work" in the OP?
>There is literally nothing wrong with sex as transaction
>as a transaction
The point is to end that "transaction." Prostitution only exists as long as there is property to exchange. Without that, there's just sex-love or voluntary sex for pleasure. This is why when anarchists go on another pro-sex worker rant and how it will still exist in their commune, they don't know what they're talking about. If there is nothing to exchange, there is no "sex work."
>I believe in earnest the whole moralizing prostitution thing is really a mask for gender narratives
Not really. It's mostly a concern for the circumstance that cause a women to seek prostitution. Even in the developed world, the vast majority of prostitution is coerced by economic factors, like poor immigrants being funneled into sex trafficking. Poptimism does nothing to address this, instead trying to disguise the immiseration with yassss queen ideology.
Some reject it because they think it's icky and offends their moral system, but those people are libs that don't care about the broader social reasons for its existence. They're religious moralizers.
>No matter how the moralizers try to frame it as being about whether sex can be "work" or not, in reality, the activity itself, and its semantics, are irrelevant in terms of human suffering.
I agree that it's pedantic to argue whether they're proletarian or petit-bourgeois, but Marx and Engels specifically pointed at them as lumpenproletariat, or part of the dangerous classes. Engels went on to say that prostitutes primarily exploit men in his work "Origin of the Family," as they extract money from Johns and this is something that is true even for "lesser" sex work like strippers. They subsist on identifying rich clients and extracting money from them (something they brag about, if you've ever known any), which is how it's "exploitive" or in other words, not an incel argument. Read some stories from people who visited the legal red-light districts and they rob people just to walk in.
You could argue that Marx and Engels were too dismissive of prostitutes, but I don't actually see an argument against the transactional nature of their existence and so it would quickly go into moral grounds. Something else I noticed is that pro-sex work people never really defend street walking, betraying they find some part of it aesthetically disturbing and would prefer it hidden away. It's the same reason people don't like seeing the homeless, because it acts as a reminder of what could become of people if they don't "make it" in capitalism. Marx makes a similar point to how vagrancy used to be illegal, as a form of terror against people who didn't want to work. It still exists, just in a more subtle way.
>The actual causes of suffering…
All occupational hazards but you ignore the economic immiseration that encourages it. This is why sex work is very lib-coded. I agree they shouldn't go to jail for prostitution, but that's a different topic than encouraging it. I want there to be crackdowns on sex traffickers and it's hard to do so when they're "legitimate" businesspeople. I'm mostly ambivalent to it though, so I wouldn't really care if it did become legalized in its entirety. My ultimate hope is for it to vanish entirely.
<but that sounds authoritarian! They should do what they want
Notice I never argued that we should control a woman's sexuality. If they want to have a lot of sex, publish videos of their sex acts as some form of kink or have affairs, I do not care. "Sex-work" however, is exploitation and people should strive to end the means causing its existence, ultimately to free sex from its materialist connections.
Idk if this was covered in the thread, but like the arguments against legalizing prostitution showing that it raised, is it because it was legalized or because it's on the books?
Like Sweden had an "increase" of rapes when they expanded the definition of rape, but the reality wasnt the amount of victims increased just the database entries.
>>2529366OP isn't claiming prostitution would exist in communism. Rather, that in a world of commodity exchange, selling/buying sex is irrationally singled out; moralized. Hence OP questions, for what purpose? It was Marx himself who stated that all laborers are prostitutes in the 1844 Manuscripts.
There's a double standard somewhere in here that people are missing out on. People say prostitution is "the oldest profession" or whatever and we act as if women were the first to commodify their own bodies, but what the hell do you think marriage was in its original form? It was ownership, a commodity. Fathers sold their daughters off to some man and she became his property, that's what marriage was until pretty recently in history. If anything this is even more degrading than dehumanizing than prostitution, a woman isn't voluntarily renting herself to a man, she's being involuntarily sold to a man. But this is perfectly okay, more than okay in fact, it is a holy and virtuous tradition. So it's not about women's bodies being sold and degraded; it's about who is doing the selling. It's about whether a woman's body is her own property or someone else's.
>>2528976>if someone is voluntarily doing work they feel comfortable with and is not being exploitedAll work is exploitation what the fuck are you on about?!? how did you even find this site?!?
Unique IPs: 126