I ain’t gonna judge how one chooses to sell their body, time, safety, health, etc. But we do need to treat sex workers like other workers and ensure they have safe working conditions and the freedom to leave their employment at will. Heck while we’re at it we should extend it to agricultural labor too
Farm workers in Ontario, Canada are not entitled to:
- minimum wage
- daily and weekly limits on hours of work
- daily rest periods
- time off between shifts
- weekly/bi-weekly rest periods
- eating periods
- three-hour rule (if you show up for work and are sent home before you’ve been there for three hours, most jobs are required to pay you for three hours)
- overtime pay
- public holidays or public holiday pay
- vacation with pay
Are you suggesting we don’t give it to sex workers because farmers don’t have it or we give it to farmers too.
Technically I think most farmers are their own business so if they want to have holidays off they can. The alternative is state run farms which I support fully and completely.
Think they were referring to the last sentence from the comment they replied to:
Heck while we’re at it we should extend it to agricultural labor too
So most definitely just supporting agricultural workers rights.
Technically I think most farmers are their own business so if they want to have holidays off they can
Only 47% are self employed actually, and 30% are temporary foreign workers that can get screwed pretty bad
Only 47% are self employed
Does this count family members?
I’m just saying what farm workers don’t get. Farm workers and sex workers both deserve better than they get. This is specifically for people employed on farms and not for people who own farm businesses. Most of our food is grown by people making less than minimum wage. The people who own the farms aren’t the ones doing most of the work.
You’re crazy! /s
Especially agricultural work, as there is equally as much (sexual) exploitation happening!
I feel people who equalise sex work with other jobs downplay (immensely) the toll sex work has on the majority of sex workers.
It is really not comparable to construction work or any other job. Even in countries were sex work has long been legalised, there is no other job, by a long shot, which has so many people suffering from PTSD, drug and alcohol abuse.
To be blunt, that’s not at all relevant to the fact that they should have the same rights as everyone else if they do choose to do it.
That’s why I was not saying they shouldn’t have the same rights as everybody else. But instead I said what I said?! That this type of comparisons to other jobs downplays in my opinion that sex work is not just like any other job.
Are you aware of any sources specifically evaluating participation in sex work as a causal factor in mental and substance disorders (as opposed to sex work represented more prominently in populations already affected)?
Yes, this study corrected for reports of CSA, lower income, etc. in people who are drug addicts. For those who are additionally sex workers they found:
increased rates of mental and physical health problems (eg, suicide attempts, anxiety, STDs, and bloodborne infections) and use of some health services (eg, emergency department visits for women and mental health services for men)
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/482625#SEC2
There aren’t many studies done which correct for mental health issues before someone starts as a sex worker. Even less which achieve a long-term study over a cohort of sex workers where not ~80 % can’t be found anymore for various reasons.
But there are a few on how to protect the
Johnssex workers from STDs. I leave the interpretation of this inbalance in research to you. :-)If two effects are correlated, then three possible causal relationships are possible.
A first effect may cause the second, or the second may cause the first, or a so-called third variable may cause both.
It is possible that an individual who has been afflicted by certain difficulties is more likely to participate in sex work.
It is also possible that individuals from certain populations are more likely to participate in sex work, and also, due to being associated with the population, are also more likely to be afflicted by certain difficulties.
Both possibilities must be considered as alternative to sex work causing such difficulties, to explain the correlation.
I do know how correlation works. The study above shows that, when you correct for previous mental health issues, for lower socioeconomic status, low income, drug abuse, etc. sex work increases various mental and physical health risks and mortality.
Right. The remaining possibility is the third variable. Membership in certain populations may be associated with increased likelihood of becoming a sex worker and also of experiencing difficulties that you are suggested are caused directly by being a sex worker. Such difficulties may appear after someone has become a sex worker, even while having an independence cause.
Sure, but that is true for ever job then. An unknown and hidden confounding factor explaining job choice and the problems of the job can always exist.
Police officer or fire fighter aren’t actually dangerous. It is simply that people who are more likely to make bad decisions that get them killed also are those that choose to be police officer or fire fighters.
Burnout does not affect teachers with higher probability than it affects hairdressers. It is because people who get burnouts are also the people who choose to be teachers.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Um, law enforcement comes to mind.
Not to say PTSD and unhealthy coping problems aren’t a valod concern, but if we’re going to try to reduce jobs based on how taxing they are on the human psyche, there are a number of fields that are respected that also qualify.
Off the top of my head, schoolteacher and service industry worker. Cooks amd wait staff.
No, apparently not even war veterans have similar high rates of PTSD.
For sources you can look here, for example: https://bmcwomenshealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12905-017-0491-y
Or here: https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-459170/v1.pdf
When you consider that even in countries like Germany it’s almost exclusively poor women from other countries, often single mothers and/or already with mental health issues, who do sex work, I think it’s very naive to believe the job is the same like flipping burgers or construction work. Or that these issues only stem from stigma and working conditions.
Unless I missed them, I don’t see comparisons to war veterans, at most the second one compares them to civilian survivors.
In any case, I don’t think anyone is questioning the fact that sex workers need way safer working conditions, it was the very point of the first commenter. “Treating them like other workers” was meant in a good sense, as they’re currently treated worse.
These jobs don’t come close, though. They also don’t attract primarily people who are already poor and mentally unwell to put them into a situation hard to leave that further increases their problems.
I feel like you’re ignoring the reality that the prostitution industry avoids formal recognition by its very nature. Clients want to stay anonymous, pimps want to stay underground, and many prostitutes want to remain under the radar. Formal recognition is a necessary prerequisite for regulation and labor law.
I agree, but I for one am not enamored with the idiom of selling one’s body.
That’s the point, isn’t it? If the term wasn’t specifically coined for this, it’s been long used to shame sex workers. Which is sort of funny, considering all labor involves selling your body in some form or another.
I am not following your explanation. The phrasing is extremely unclear.
The idiom is at least somewhat derisive, both historically and intrinsically.
Like I said, that is the point of the idiom. It’s historically been used specifically towards sex work in a derogatory fashion.
However the reality of the phrase, “selling your body,” is that it’s true for all labor. One could argue it is especially true when it comes to something like construction work, which can be very hard on your body and impart long term health effects.
I think there’s plenty of use in taking an idiom that’s been used to harm others and flipping it back the other direction.
The idiom is not “true”, or false, for particular varieties of labor.
An idiom carries the meaning understood from broader usage patterns.
Your analysis is not particularly accurate, that the intrinsic content of the phrase describes particular labor better than other, especially in the way you have argued.
At any rate, sex work is the context of the discussion, and how the phrase was employed specifically, from which my objection was raised.
As such your emphasis may seem to be misdirection, perhaps seeking pedantry or virtue signaling, more than engagement that is honest and substantive.
Good lord, you must be fun at parties.
I’m well aware of what an idiom is and how they’re used. I understand that traditionally the phrase, “selling your body,” is employing the idiom that means to engage in sex work. I also understand that this is what you’re referring in the initial comment I replied to. I understand the idiom itself doesn’t refer to other forms of labor because that’s not how idioms work.
My point is that if you take the literal phrase “selling your body,” you can very easily construe it to be just as true about any labor. Like I said, I’d argue this point is illustrated particularly well manual labor. You are commodifying the physical use of your body to achieve a task, often at a heavy cost to your body if done in the long term.
This is not me changing the context of the discussion. I’d very much argue that this is actually a very useful point to make in the context of sex work. We are taking an idiom that has been historically used to harm people, and deconstructing it. The intent being to point out how sex workers aren’t any more, “selling their body” than people in other forms of socially accepted work.
Again I understand the idiom refers specifically to sex work, but if we deconstruct it we can use it to point out a hypocracy in the thought process of those using it.
This is not me changing the context of the discussion.
We are taking an idiom that has been historically used to harm people, and deconstructing it.
You were deconstructing the idiom, and in doing so, you were erasing the context.
The comment that initially invoked the idiom employed it as a reference to sex work, following the original usage of the idiom, which is understood stigmatically.
I raised an alarm, and indeed, an exceedingly mild one, but instead of meeting my remarks on their merits, you preferred to engage in pedantry and virtue signaling, by attacking a straw man.
More, no one sells one’s body, taken as the “literal phrase”.
You can’t do it. You can sell a car, a house, the shirt off your back, but everyone has exactly one body through life. I have mine and you have yours.
It is not particularly meaningful to analyze which labor is described accurately versus not by the phrase of the idiom, because the phrase has no coherent literal meaning. Hence, the phrase is understood only idiomatically.
Yeah, it’s probably more akin to a rental or timeshare setup (or so I’ve heard).
It would be a more direct and accurate metaphor, though of course still potentially stigmatizing for the same reasons.
Unfortunately, others are often unwilling to engage thoughtfully or sensibly.
They lurk on the shadows, ready to pounce on a straw man, in order that they may claim they slew Goliath.
Their tactics are successful in the same way as clickbait.
It’s literally done daily by sex workers, manual laborers, models, actors …
Very true. I sold my body at work today and now I’m just a disembodied consciousness floating around in the ether, posting on Lemmy.
You can always save for a new one.
What is being done is not one in the same as the idiom chosen to describe what is being done.
They certainly are one and the same, you’re just scared of stigma.
Stop imposing your judgments on me.
Do you understand the concept of an idiom?
It seems not, as you have insisted the particular idiom describes what is being done “literally”.
It is “literally” what is being done. I went to work today and “sold my body”. That was a use of my time and energy that I can not get back in exchange for money I need to survive.
Removed by mod
You’re the one uncomfortable with the phrase, buddy.
Removed by mod
I believe that all work under capitalism is coercive and workers do not fully consent to wage labor. Sex work is work under capitalism, therefore many sex workers are not fully consenting during sex due to the coercive nature of capitalism. Sex without full consent of both participants is rape.
workers do not fully consent to wage labor
This right here! Okay so to consent to something you need to be reasonably informed. There is no such thing as perfect knowledge so the standard is what a reasonable person (the legal definition, not the colloquial one). I’ll bet you that very few people are actually reasonably informed when we take and work out jobs. How much value does your individual labour add to the economy? Not what you’re paid, how much money does your work make total? Do any of us know, or even have an idea? We negotiate away our labour without knowing what that labour is actually worth. Worse than that, the person who does know will never tell you because they also pay you and it’s not in their interests to tell you how much your worth.
Workers do not fully consent to wage labour because we literally can’t. We’re giving concent without being informed, any other aspect of civil society that would be a crime. For employment it’s just the way it goes.
This is one part of it. I also think it’s important to think about how all labor under capitalism is coerced under the implicit threat of starvation and homelessness. Decisions made under duress cannot count as full consent.
ALL labour? I don’t think someone getting their job as CEO in a 4th company is choosing that job to avoid starvation.
If sex work is bad because a woman’s sexuality should be saved for her husband,
And if the husband’s role is to provide work in turn for his wife’s sexual access,
And if being gay is bad,What does it make you when you go work for another man?
yeah I’ll go ahead and integrate that into my belief system
working for other people is thus a sexual transaction, and therefore if you work for the same gender you are gay
I should clarify that I didn’t make these rules, they did
“some guy”
Meh. That’s not inevitable. Some jobs are empowering, constructive and contributing.
Are those the jobs where you’re the one running the business?
Can be. Easier when it isn’t for some.
I’m off to work now to train psychotherapists
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
This is such a lib take that it pains me to read it. The whole post is worth a read, btw.
https://proletarianfeminist.medium.com/the-problem-with-the-phrase-sex-work-is-work-bdac613eb2f0
Such a complete misunderstanding of the industry is the result of a flattening of distinctions between all work and a misunderstanding of Marxist theory. Wage labor is exploitative because of the surplus value extracted from the workers’ labor. Prostitution is sexual exploitation because it feeds off of extreme vulnerability to maintain a class of prostitutes, coerces sex through money and power, and exposes those women to high amounts of rape and violence. Not all work involves coercive sex, not all work comes with the high risk of rape and male violence in whatever legal context it operates under. Not all work puts the body and it’s component parts on the market to be bought, sold, and rented at will to the highest bidder.
deleted by creator
I feel like your completely glossing over the whole increased risk of rape and violence aspect that prostitution involves compared to wage labor.
It is not about sex, it is about money. Because money is something people need to live it calls in question whether or not the sex is freely given or coerced. If a person has sex with someone not because they want to do so, but because they have to, I do not think there is much difference whether or not the threat comes from say violence or starvation. If people want to have consensual sex I think that is great in all forms that can take. If the consent is contingent on monetary compensation I think there is a high chance, though admittedly not entirely certain, that the sex is being coerced in some way, which I would say constitutes rape. Why do you think it is okay to have an uneven allocation of money in a society so that those on the top can do with those on the bottom as they want?
deleted by creator
It was not my intention to put words in your mouth, but to put to words what myself, and maybe others, think is wrong with sex work and why it is not “a profession like any other”. It has never been about it being morally okay to offer sex. It is about it being morally not okay to ask for it in exchange for money. While we are at it I think the real consequences of allowing for sex work is not empowering women, but extending the grip of the patriarchy, whose tool is money, to realms were they should not be.
as a sex worker, i don’t find it either debasing or dehumanising
i have a well paying job and i do it because i want to
Do you plan on this being a lifelong career for you? Why or why not?
oh sorry i mean i have a well paying lifelong career and i do sex work just because i like it. i don’t do it for the money; in fact, my rule is that im only allowed to spend the money on kink, fetish, and sex toys because i don’t want it to become necessary. i know ill get older at some point and that’d be a problem: i’m over 30 right now and i can pull off a certain kind of daddy bear look, but not even that’ll last forever
i also find with other friends that do only sex work (because they enjoy it), it often makes the recreational sex that you have less fun… that’s the most common reason they stop doing it: starting on sex work not out of necessity tends to mean you quite enjoy sex, and that it’s a big part of how you relax and decompress
deleted by creator
that’s just completely ignorant tbh
sex work is frequently reduced to exploitation when it’s unregulated, but making it illegal doesn’t stop it: it just makes the problem worse
when you regulate sex work (like where i live, in victoria australia) you solve a huge amount of problems. you’re not allowed to represent a sex worker here, so it’s all “sole trader” kind of stuff, or the other kind is working at a brothel which has a huge list of restrictions and you have a proper employment contract with health and safety requirements like any other job
i’m not saying exploitation doesn’t happen, but exploration can’t be stopped so it’s about harm minimisation… legal and de stigmatised sex work means when people make choices to do sex work they’re protected and have plenty of avenues to get out when they need to
*edit: also who is this “we”? don’t talk for people you don’t know… sex work isn’t an issue where i live, and id imagine you don’t have quite the majority you think you do… don’t assume your bubble represents the world
deleted by creator
People are choosing to sell their body?
yes, i am, and plenty of my friends do to… we have regular jobs too. don’t be so judgementalDo you really think that just because it is legal that the only people doing it aren’t ones in complete poverty?
of course not; problems exist everywhere, but we do have a functioning unemployment system which massively raises the barit’s also not about absolutely nothing bad happens: no matter whether it’s illegal or not people are going to do sex work… its about harm minimisation and in a system where there’s no stigma, sex workers can seek help without fear of reprisal and have laws that help them
And secondly, saying that there can’t be pimps doesn’t make it so.
true, but i’ve never heard of it being so, and i’ve heard of plenty of other issues with sex work… this just doesn’t seem to be one of themExploitation can be stopped by providing economic conditions where people aren’t becoming prostitutes.
or by not stigmatising sex work… sex work, by the way, is the correct termSex work isn’t an issue where you live? That’s such a fucking privileged thing to say.
i guess you’re right… i’m privileged to have massive government studies and research in the topic that led them to the conclusion that this was the correct choice, and i’m privileged to live here and to have life experience as a sex worker… i’m privileged to be a sex worker and not have people like you around me stigmatising and contributing to the very issue huh claim to be against simply because of some shitty “morals” which is actually about controlling people’s choicesI don’t have a majority of people who oppose exploitation? Well, when I say we, I’m referring to good people
and there it is… anyone that doesn’t agree with your world view isn’t a good person? jesus christ mate… try living outside your bubble for half a second… turns out the world doesn’t work the way you think it should. turns out problems aren’t black and white, and turns out knee jerk reactions without evidence is a shit way to governdeleted by creator
i don’t know what else to say here other than to reiterate that you’re provably wrong on all fronts
as i’ve said: i live in a place where SEX WORK is regulated rather than criminalised, and we have significantly lower levels of associated social issues because of it… it’s not a theory, it’s a fact backed up by numerous government enquiries…
in fact, up until a year ago there were more restrictions and they significantly loosened them, because it was found that many of the minimal restrictions were detrimental to protecting people from harm and exploitation
https://www.vic.gov.au/sex-work-decriminalisation
i’m not going to reply any more because Brandolini’s law exists
I honestly don’t know if I should up or down vote. The way you phrased that, after rereading it several times, I still can’t understand exactly what you’re trying to say.
Could you try again please?
JC Denton stands against prostitution
Apprenticeship are a thing, you know that right?
sex work should be banned cause the ‘clients’ are rapists, all work is coerced
