I agree with this but despise the "third wave" bullshit of actually glorifying sex work as if it isn't utterly disgusting and degrading. There is some segment of sex work done largely by people who don't have to do it and could easily quit it and do something else at any time that may be "empowering" in some sense for that narrow population doing it, more or less for their own amusement, but the vast majority of it is just plain awful.
Yes, exactly. Dipping a toe into the sex industry and playing at being ‘one of the poors’ for a few months may be exciting to those who have a trust fund to fall back on, but impoverished women who depend on it to pay their bills don’t just get the luxury of quitting. Third wavers praising an industry that will just as soon chew them up and spit them out is mindboggling.
Maybe in the 1980s. All that being in porn means now is that the premium snapchat videos you film in the comfort of your/your sugar daddy's home are going to be uploaded to 4chan.
You’ll never ban prostitution, it will always exist. The question is how to manage that in a way that causes the least harm to the women/men selling the sex and to society in general. To me, that’s the Nordic model. If you outright legalise you create more problems than you solve.
We are in an era of multi drug resistant gonorrhoea- there’s been a huge rise in cases linked to the tolerance zone in Leeds. There’s a wider societal harm from widespread legalisation both in disease terms and in acceptance and crime, trafficking blah blah.
Outright legalisation is not the way morally I’d argue as well because it sets a societal precedent. We’ll never get rid of murder either but that doesn’t mean we just shrug and say it’s legal and let’s tax it.
Nordic model is the least harmful way. Just my opinion,
Maybe in the 1980s. All that being in porn means now is that the premium snapchat videos you film in the comfort of your/your sugar daddy's home are going to be uploaded to 4chan.
Porn companies and professional shoots still exist. Like, a lot of them. This is the type of porn I was talking about, not DIY camgirls.
And Max Hardcore (the guy in the video) still produces porn. He had a rape claim out against him a few years ago by a porn actress. He wouldnt stop fucking her during a shoot even though she was saying stop or something like that. Cant remember the details.
I'm personally not a fan of the nordic model. You can't illegalise one half of a commercial exchange without opening up floodgates to rampant extortion and blackmail. It might not have happened yet on paper, but these grey-market dealings are difficult to quantify and we all know it's either happening or bound to happen. A lot of radfems would just say 'Johns have it coming' but I think it's a basic duty as a society, right or wrong, to clearly illegalise things or legalise them, and not leave some kind of bizarre half-legalised system in place.
I don't fully support the german or new zealand system either, mind you. I think the best outcome would be if the sex trade was treated as a 'dirty business' in the same way short-term lendings are treated in Australia, with extra oversight regarding organised crime involvement and regular inspections to root out illegalities in a wholly legal system.
Porn companies and professional shoots still exist. Like, a lot of them. This is the type of porn I was talking about, not DIY camgirls.
And Max Hardcore (the guy in the video) still produces porn. He had a rape claim out against him a few years ago by a porn actress. He wouldnt stop fucking her during a shoot even though she was saying stop or something like that. Cant remember the details.
Sure. They represent like .5% of the porn business. It's like saying if you work for an energy company you're going to end up dead at the bottom of a coal mine.
Sure. They represent like .5% of the porn business. It's like saying if you work for an energy company you're going to end up dead at the bottom of a coal mine.
No, you are. I'm talking about what being a "woman in porn" is in 2019, particularly as feminism is engaged with it. You're talking about a tiny subset of Southern California porn producers.
No, you are. I'm talking about what being a "woman in porn" is in 2019, particularly as feminism is engaged with it. You're talking about a tiny subset of Southern California porn producers.
Yes, cam girls fall under the definition of porn, but that clearly not the category I was talking about. You're trying to conflate produced porn with cam girls. You're also trying to make it seem like porn production is small, when it isn't. And there are more markets with porn production companies than just California. The world's a huge place. Even in America..porn is produced in every state. There are a ton of fetish oriented websites that do nothing but produce porn, not located in California. There's also a million other countries in the world.
Yes, cam girls fall under the definition of porn, but that clearly not the category I was talking about. You're trying to conflate produced porn with cam girls. You're also trying to make it seem like porn production is small, when it isn't. And there are more markets with porn production companies than just California. The world's a huge place. Even in America..porn is produced in every state. There are a ton of fetish oriented websites that do nothing but produce porn, not located in California. There's also a million other countries in the world.
I'm obviously not being literal when I say that professional porn only comes from southern california, but I'm saying that the porn studio system that results in the abuses that you're talking about is based there and most pornography isn't coming from that system. The economy of porn is much more dispersed.
I'm not going to make any assumptions about how old you are, but you have a boomer's understanding of the economic systems at play, which is made very clear by your imaginary distinction between "camgirls" and "porn actresses." Girls are not fantasizing about moving across the country to do become studio girls for Hustler like Jenna Jameson or whatever - they're opening Patreons, verified pornhub accounts, premium snapchats, onlyfans accounts and clips4sale stores to peddle their wares. They want to be chic porn "influencers" like Julia Rose and Belle Delphine who operate out of their bedrooms. This is important to understand because that's what third/fourth wavers are talking about when they say that sex work and prostitution is liberating. If you just wanted to say that porn is bad, I'm with you, but the I think your implication was that third wave feminism is pro-pornography, and it is - but not the kind of industrialized porn that you're talking about. They're not going to talk badly about any consensual pornography because they're doing the whole "sexual freedom, anything goes" routine, but it's intellectually dishonest to act like they're seriously promoting the likes of Kink.Com or Evil Angel and the like, much less the Max Hardcores of the world.
Absolutely. Marketers, big businesses, the military, always have (and always will) glamorize and hide the dangers of their products or professions. It's protecting their capital, that's what they do. This is feminism, though, and we have our own set of priorities and focuses. Nothing is stopping you from starting a union for acid miners, but acid-mining and sucking unwashed cock because you need to keep your electricity on aren't quite the same thing, even if many similarities can be drawn between them.
They face those risks because women make up most of that industry, and since feminism's focal point is "addressing women's issues", that's why feminists are primarily concerned with it.
Did your phone have a boomer moment and post this entire paragraph of bullshit too, or are you good?
That's my question to you. How are the two not different? Sucking the cock or risking death in a "acid mine" are both high risk professions, often undertaken when no other option is available. Is the man in the mine not prostituting himself out as well through his labor? And what is stopping the sex workers from organizing for better conditions the these hypothetical acid miners can? I am genuinely curious as to to your thoughts on this.
Did you see how I ended that paragraph without a snide remark? You get that?
ut I think it's a basic duty as a society, right or wrong, to clearly illegalise things or legalise them, and not leave some kind of bizarre half-legalised system in place.
That debate is a really interesting one. Feminist gut feeling says sex industry is almost always harmful for women, and should be illegal. Practical me says Nordic model. Scientist me says ‘I want to see data on each.’ I outright reject legalisation having seen how it worked in Germany.
I think actually quantifying harm is extremely difficult. That spike in northern STD rates - it’s linked to the Leeds zone but what else influences it? Migration? Any other sex practises (Leeds is a hotbed of dodginess, it’s where Mermaids operate, and MESMAC, and several of the grooming rings.) the harm done from prostitution has so many facets - the primary ‘girl trafficked from wherever and raped’ stuff is the primary one but there’s organised crime, poverty, drug use, STDs, psychological issues that go down the generations etc. The specific solution for a specific country or community I can see being very different depending on where it is.
Example: Prohibition didn’t work in America and caused all manner of social problems/helped the mob get a grip, but the Greenlandic alcohol rationing was voluntary and was positive.
Does anyone have a good source of data on the various models for criminalisation? It’s hard to find anything that’s not obviously biased
I agree with this but despise the "third wave" bullshit of actually glorifying sex work as if it isn't utterly disgusting and degrading. There is some segment of sex work done largely by people who don't have to do it and could easily quit it and do something else at any time that may be "empowering" in some sense for that narrow population doing it, more or less for their own amusement, but the vast majority of it is just plain awful.
Camwhoring. That's about the "safest" sex work I can think of and it's always the example brought up to justify it. You don't hear third wave feminists bragging about the cock they sucked behind Arby's for rent. It's always "what about those thots with patreons?"
You've reminded me of that song "Common People" by Pulp. Where the chick will never get it right because when she's laying in bed at night watching roaches climb the wall she knows if she calls her dad he could stop it all.
Honestly though, I'll buy this argument that sex work is just like coal mining when coal miners start getting raped and killed at the same rate.
Edit: I don't know enough about the different models of legalization/decriminalization to speak on it but I tend to agree with Dynastia having had experience working with women in one facet of the industry. The industry is never going away as long as we have a need for money in society since the other requirement for the industries existence, the male sex drive, isn't going anywhere. Sex work is going to continue to happen regardless of whether you think it's harmful or not. Best to reduce as much harm as possible. I hope you guys argue about it more though because one can learn a lot from a kiwi.
For the same reasons we don’t have paid organ donation. If someone is totally ‘free’ to act then they can give altruistically. However in reality it’s rarely a free choice where money is involved. Pregnancy is physically the most dangerous thing women will do. If you have a contract to deliver a healthy baby and you develop a complication that will injure or kill you, then what? What if the baby is not perfect? There was a case in n Australia where the commissioning couple dumped one twin with downs back on the carrying mother. She now has to support that child for life.
What if surrogacy is so common that a women seeking jobseekers benefits is forced into it? It’s already happened in Germany that a woman was denied benefits for refusing a job in a brothel. http://archive.li/8T7tL
Both organ donation and surrogacy require informed consent, especially organ donation that's done pre-mortem. And a single case where assholes breached contact and were grossly unethical (abandoning that child is at least unethical, and I'm sure we can find many other words to describe it) does not eliminate that surrogacy is primarily done for couples that cannot otherwise have a successful pregnancy.
Surrogacy is bad for the baby as well - the baby is born not really ready due to our massive heads. If you’ve ever had a newborn you’ll know how incredibly vulnerable they are and the concept of the fourth trimester. Babies need to be with their mothers - they know your voice and smell from birth. To remove a baby from the mother is abhorrent. It’s not best for the baby. Humans are not commodities to sell. Surrogacy is producing humans for sale. Women are not wombs for rent. It’s not the same power dynamic as selling labour, it’s selling the body and it has significant health repercussions for the mother.
All babies are born with out-of-proportion heads, and this makes it sound like you're stridently anti-adoption, too. The right of a mother to surrender a child through adoption and Baby Moses laws are one of the many battles that the 2nd Wave was very focused on winning. As abhorrent as you may consider such things, I'm going to bet that we can all agree that any number of reasons exist for adoption and Baby Moses surrender, and I can absolutely promise that this is still in the category of the types of sexual agency that 2nd Wave feminists fought for during the Sexual Revolution.
I won't buy an argument from any of you that women should be recognized as having sexual agency for some parts of their lives, but there's other parts where you'll deny them - women are either competent adults (inasmuch as any human being is), or you're going to have to admit that you want the same control as the Religious Right does over women's autonomy and agency. Inf act, I'm just going to start copy-pasting "Her body, her choice!", every time any of you sound like the Religious Right.
I'll need to see citations for the post-partum effects you're claiming, as well.
Sex work ... the tiny minority are happy hookers. Most are women, girls and boys too who have been coerced. It’s a ‘job’ with a huge risk of violence. These are figures I’ve seen reproduced elsewhere: http://archive.li/L0KCQ
“Fifty-seven percent reported that they had been sexually assaulted as children and 49% reported that they had been physically assaulted as children. As adults in prostitution, 82% had been physically assaulted; 83% had been threatened with a weapon; 68% had been raped while working as prostitutes; and 84% reported current or past homelessness.” High 80%s want to leave.
Once again, every other example of legalization I'm given you has shown greater safety and public attention focused on the phenomenon in question. Forcing sex work underground and into the control of organized crime is placing women at risk, unless you have data demonstrating otherwise, and thus far, no one has presented data that shows that legalized prostitution is more dangerous than illegal prostitution.
Yup. Women prisoners shouldn’t have to be locked up with Male sex offenders.
Women prisoners in mother and baby units shouldn’t have to be locked up with convicted Male child abusers
Women should have the right to reproductive autonomy.
Women should have the single sex spaces needed for our privacy dignity and safety.
In the UK, even the legal defiant of woman is under threat and if the GRA changes go through the equality act as it pertains to women and girls will be useless. That means all our rights and protections down the drain. Big issue.
Surrogacy is being reviewed in the UK with a clear push to make it legal. Amazing how everyone knows what a woman is when you need to rent a womb.
Everyone has a right to be subject to criminal custody away from predators, and you're complaining about something another branch of feminism has done, or that you are arguing against within this very thread. Allow me to answer every point you're putting forward -
- Female prisoners (mothers or not) being in custody with transwomen? Thank feminists in favour of self-ID as the sole threshold for "being trans."
- Female prisoners (mothers or not) being in custody with transwomen? Thank feminists in favour of self-ID as the sole threshold for "being trans."
- "Women should have the right to reproductive autonomy, except when I insist that they not be allowed to consent to being surrogates."
- Once again, please thank trans-inclusive feminists, and explain why there's been a massive drive to allow intrusion on men's-only spaces?
- So your complaint is that other feminists, specifically trans-inclusive ones, have fucked you over, in yet another way?
- "Women should have the right to reproductive autonomy, except when I insist that they not be allowed to consent to being surrogates."
Nothing in that list is anything but the fault of feminists, so I'm looking forward to someone here spinning me a story about how "Patriarchy oppresses women!"
What can I say, every movement has extremists. My personal view is that demonising men is pointless and counterproductive. There are issues that affect only men and they need addressing too. The men’s rights movement, or bits of it, could be accused of being just as insane and woman hating as the man haters - that doesn’t help boys in poverty though, and it probably doesn’t reflect the beliefs of the people who are actually making a difference on the ground rather than on Twitter.
Sure, Elam is an inflammatory old wind bag that rights mediocre satire, and Esmay is back on the "God-Bothering Train", but let's say that they're the most obvious examples of complete, focused, deranged autism and exceptionalism amongst MRAs - the entirety of the 2nd Wave group that formed in NY to lobby against pornography is a list of names that are still known and referred to quite regularly by modern feminists, and I recognize more than half the list as authors of more than 1 book, each.
If the total number of examples of absolutely exceptional fuckups you've got for MRAs is 2, compared to just that list of anti-sex-work feminist authors, then I contend that feminism is still vastly more powerful, because that's 11 feminists (many of them successful authors) vs 2 dumbfucks with questionable reach.
And so far as men's issues in general are concerned, I can find you numerous examples of feminists going out of their way to interfere with addressing those men's issues, and that shit really needs to stop. I'm going to hazard a guess that you're the stripe of feminist that (like Butler) is focused entirely on women's issues, and does not feel that feminism needs to assist men, except incidentally, and I can accept that position, as long as feminists stop interfering with non-feminist advocacy.
I will also say that I think that the demonisation of men is another facet of SJW ism and the progressive stack. And that one of the things that stack does is push every other issue to the fore except the one that really needs looking at which is class and poverty. Much better to have boomers versus millennials or men vs women or black vs white than to have the common man say ‘hang on a minute, why is this giant corporation not paying tax...?’
Pseudo-Marxist class analysis underpins a lot of 2nd & 3rd Wave feminism, and it absolutely underpins SocJus, to the extent that men and women are presented as oppressor and oppressed, bourgeoisie and proletariat, respectively. Until you can sort out how to get the Marxism out of feminism, and rid the movement of the conspiracy theory that men exist as cruel, animalistic predators that exist solely to coordinate the oppression of women, men will continue to be demonized.
I mean, men are 93% of all workplaces fatalities in the US, the vast majority of crippling workplace injuries, 78% of murder victims, and the overwhelming majority of victims of violent crime. You were saying something, though?
Sure. They represent like .5% of the porn business. It's like saying if you work for an energy company you're going to end up dead at the bottom of a coal mine.
The porn "gonzo" industry was inspired by Max Hardcore. As of 20 years back, it was way more than 0.5 percent. It's expanded since. Forced vomiting (gagging), fisting, slapping happen as par for the course. This one guy Mark Handel (the brother of the Handel on the Law radio show guy) developed a show called Meatholes where he picked up homeless guys in a van, then ordered the women to do these things with them. He was eventually PNGed, not for doing that, but for not requiring that the guys have a current HIV test. Kink.com did similar, they'd take women to closed bars in SF with dozens of men basically tearing the women apart. One had her breast implant ruptured, but it was only when one got HIV that the city/state cracked down on them. They moved to Vegas.
Both organ donation and surrogacy require informed consent, especially organ donation that's done pre-mortem. And a single case where assholes breached contact and were grossly unethical (abandoning that child is at least unethical, and I'm sure we can find many other words to describe it) does not eliminate that surrogacy is primarily done for couples that cannot otherwise have a successful pregnancy.
All babies are born with out-of-proportion heads, and this makes it sound like you're stridently anti-adoption, too. The right of a mother to surrender a child through adoption and Baby Moses laws are one of the many battles that the 2nd Wave was very focused on winning. As abhorrent as you may consider such things, I'm going to bet that we can all agree that any number of reasons exist for adoption and Baby Moses surrender, and I can absolutely promise that this is still in the category of the types of sexual agency that 2nd Wave feminists fought for during the Sexual Revolution.
I won't buy an argument from any of you that women should be recognized as having sexual agency for some parts of their lives, but there's other parts where you'll deny them - women are either competent adults (inasmuch as any human being is), or you're going to have to admit that you want the same control as the Religious Right does over women's autonomy and agency. Inf act, I'm just going to start copy-pasting "Her body, her choice!", every time any of you sound like the Religious Right.
I'll need to see citations for the post-partum effects you're claiming, as well.
Once again, every other example of legalization I'm given you has shown greater safety and public attention focused on the phenomenon in question. Forcing sex work underground and into the control of organized crime is placing women at risk, unless you have data demonstrating otherwise, and thus far, no one has presented data that shows that legalized prostitution is more dangerous than illegal prostitution.
Everyone has a right to be subject to criminal custody away from predators, and you're complaining about something another branch of feminism has done, or that you are arguing against within this very thread. Allow me to answer every point you're putting forward -
- Female prisoners (mothers or not) being in custody with transwomen? Thank feminists in favour of self-ID as the sole threshold for "being trans."
- Female prisoners (mothers or not) being in custody with transwomen? Thank feminists in favour of self-ID as the sole threshold for "being trans."
- "Women should have the right to reproductive autonomy, except when I insist that they not be allowed to consent to being surrogates."
- Once again, please thank trans-inclusive feminists, and explain why there's been a massive drive to allow intrusion on men's-only spaces?
- So your complaint is that other feminists, specifically trans-inclusive ones, have fucked you over, in yet another way?
- "Women should have the right to reproductive autonomy, except when I insist that they not be allowed to consent to being surrogates."
Nothing in that list is anything but the fault of feminists, so I'm looking forward to someone here spinning me a story about how "Patriarchy oppresses women!"
Sure, Elam is an inflammatory old wind bag that rights mediocre satire, and Esmay is back on the "God-Bothering Train", but let's say that they're the most obvious examples of complete, focused, deranged autism and exceptionalism amongst MRAs - the entirety of the 2nd Wave group that formed in NY to lobby against pornography is a list of names that are still known and referred to quite regularly by modern feminists, and I recognize more than half the list as authors of more than 1 book, each.
If the total number of examples of absolutely exceptional fuckups you've got for MRAs is 2, compared to just that list of anti-sex-work feminist authors, then I contend that feminism is still vastly more powerful, because that's 11 feminists (many of them successful authors) vs 2 dumbfucks with questionable reach.
And so far as men's issues in general are concerned, I can find you numerous examples of feminists going out of their way to interfere with addressing those men's issues, and that shit really needs to stop. I'm going to hazard a guess that you're the stripe of feminist that (like Butler) is focused entirely on women's issues, and does not feel that feminism needs to assist men, except incidentally, and I can accept that position, as long as feminists stop interfering with non-feminist advocacy.
Pseudo-Marxist class analysis underpins a lot of 2nd & 3rd Wave feminism, and it absolutely underpins SocJus, to the extent that men and women are presented as oppressor and oppressed, bourgeoisie and proletariat, respectively. Until you can sort out how to get the Marxism out of feminism, and rid the movement of the conspiracy theory that men exist as cruel, animalistic predators that exist solely to coordinate the oppression of women, men will continue to be demonized.
I mean, men are 93% of all workplaces fatalities in the US, the vast majority of crippling workplace injuries, 78% of murder victims, and the overwhelming majority of victims of violent crime. You were saying something, though?
Yes I was saying something. I was saying that sex work is nothing like coal mining. You think coal mining is exploiting workers, you unionize. Someone dies? The family sues. Honestly, I'm not going to argue with you anymore. Others have said this but these are all rehashed dumb arguments you've got and it's tiring to argue them all day long. If you want to know why some feminists feel the way they do, this is the thread to ask those questions but those questions you've asked have been answered. Now you think that arguing that all the answers are wrong is going to what? Convince us all to give up feminism? Stop trying to change minds. Your questions have been answered. You don't like the answers. Move on.
Yes I was saying something. I was saying that sex work is nothing like coal mining. You think coal mining is exploiting workers, you unionize. Someone dies? The family sues. Honestly, I'm not going to argue with you anymore. Others have said this but these are all rehashed dumb arguments you've got and it's tiring to argue them all day long. If you want to know why some feminists feel the way they do, this is the thread to ask those questions but those questions you've asked have been answered. Now you think that arguing that all the answers are wrong is going to what? Convince us all to give up feminism? Stop trying to change minds. Your questions have been answered. You don't like the answers. Move on.
No, you're all being grossly inconsistent, claiming that women can exercise sexual and reproductive agency when YOU THINK IT'S OKAY, BUT NOT IN ANY WAYS YOU DON'T LIKE. Stop being an outrageously inconsistent pussy, also ImgAttachedRelevant.jpg.
No, you're all being grossly inconsistent, claiming that women can exercise sexual and reproductive agency when YOU THINK IT'S OKAY, BUT NOT IN ANY WAYS YOU DON'T LIKE. Stop being an outrageously inconsistent pussy, also ImgAttachedRelevant.jpg.
This the last I'm going to speak to you about this. You're literally just trying to antagonize people. If others want to argue with you all day, that's on them but I will not. I really don't care if you like my answers or anyone elses. I don't care if you think it's inconsistent. It's been argued it's not, you disagree. No one's mind is changed. Fucking move on.
www.reddit.com
