Selling is legal, fucking is legal, why isn't selling fucking legal?
-- George Carlin
Seas he also the fella that said “Getting paid for sex is illegal… UNLESS YOU RECORD IT!”
For years I've contemplated the idea if I came into a bunch of money if starting a porn studio where the customer is an actor/actress in the porn.
We have a building and several "sets" with cameras recording, customer picks their "partner" and "set" and "shoot the porn", after they are done the video is burned on to a dvd(or blue ray or potentially put on a private file server).
The customer isn't paying for sex, they are paying for the video.
Pretty sure it would have a ton of legal push back and I would need a lot of money for the lawyers to fight the cases.
But 1. Safer for everyone imvolved(it's video taped so you won't beat/hurt/kill the other party) 2.technically legal just like shooting porn
This is actually a great idea for couples! The issue of course would be to make sure that the couples are actual couples.
You could have them sign a release indicating that it's a "photo studio", and you can have different prices: one for commercial use ($5,000 per hour) and one for private use ($100 an hour, and you're not allowed to commercially distribute the DVD.)
Think there is a big group of customers for sex who want it captured on video?
You could burn it to a dvd or whatever, delete the file, and give the customer the only copy. Whether they choose to keep it or destroy it is their own choice.
They get the only copy... I don't care if the watch it, post it online or just it for skeet shooting with a shotgun.
Not to mention the possible tie ins...imagine if the studio partnered with onlyfans... Or offered special spaces with live streaming(with permission) to people's Webcam sites.
"remember to join the stream this Saturday where we will be on location in the pleasure dome's sunset beach set for a special sex on the beach adventure"
The underlying assumption is the same as in abortion: that women can't be entrusted with agency over their own bodies.
Because one of the biggest issues with sex work, human trafficking, gets worse with legalization. Studies across Europe have shown that countries that outlaw prostitution see a decrease in human trafficking victims while countries that legalized or decriminalized it see an increase.
Unlike with drugs, you don't just create a way to increase the supply. A very small minority of women actually want to engage in sex work. And the few who do, usually envision the high class escort lifestyle. But working in a brothel charging $100 per client isn't something many want to do.
But legalizing prostitution increases demand. Which makes it more profitable for criminals to utilize human trafficking to fill that demand.
It also doesn't help at all with protecting victims of human trafficking. Victims of human trafficking are already protected. But they don't step forward because of threats against their own well being and that of their families. Something that doesn't change just because their work technically is legal now.
Which leaves a small percentage of people who fall into financial hardship and consider prostitution as a method of overcoming said hardship. For them that might slightly improve their situation. But that still means exploiting vulnerable people and isn't people engaging in sex work because they want to. And it's even questionable if people in these scenarios would follow the legal way.
So while initially it might seem like legalizing it solves a lot of issues, it is more difficult than that.
Us laws regarding sex work are firmly based in puritanical values not out of any concern whatsoever regarding trafficking.
Thanks for the data. I think the issue here is not that legal prostitution creates problems, but rather the government bodies being incompetent at protecting the victims, then.
There are other industries in which people "sell their bodies" for profit (the military and construction come to mind), and if those can be quite regulated, why can't prostitution?
We all sell our bodies for profit. To be fair though, wage theft is the most common form of theft. We're all prostitutes and we're almost all being taken advantage of, and we're in a system where we can't really get out.
I see this single study trotted out every time the subject comes up and the key factor to take into account is that this is reported trafficking. If legalized sex work means more light is shed on human trafficking that means more can be done about it.
key factor to take into account is that this is reported trafficking. If legalized sex work means more light is shed on human trafficking that means more can be done about it.
Just because more is reported doesn't mean more isn't also happening. In fact, one could reasonably expect reporting to go down as a percentage of incidents due to ordinary citizens not expecting sex workers to be involved in trafficking since sex work is now legal. That the number goes up after the stigma is removed seems to strongly indicate a correlation with a rise in actual trafficking.
More or less is a matter of comparison. How do you compare with an underground activity that cannot be tracked as easily?
How do you compare with an underground activity that cannot be tracked as easily?
As with anything, you can only work with the data you actually have.
Sure, but all you have is assumptions and you're assuming the increased reporting of trafficking means that trafficking is increasing rather than it just getting caught more. It's like when some governments fought over covid reporting. Keeping it hidden doesn't mean less of it is happening and making it more visible doesn't mean more of it is happening.
Sure, but all you have is assumptions
Isn't that a bit of the pot calling the kettle black?
No, because you presented the study as supposed proof of more human trafficking.
First, I didn't present anything.
Second, it does prove that more human trafficking is reported.
You only have the assumption that bringing it into the light of day results in a higher rate of reporting against actual incidents. It's an interesting hypothesis, but without any evidence to support your assumption Occam's Razor dictates that the simplest answer is that the rates do not change drastically and there actually is more human trafficking to be reported.
You didn't present anything but you certainly act like you did. We're agreed in that it proves more human trafficking is reported but again, that doesn't mean more human trafficking is happening. Refer back to my example about covid case reporting. Incorrectly citing Occam's Razor doesn't strengthen your argument.
You didn't present anything but you certainly act like you did.
I did no such thing.
We're agreed in that it proves more human trafficking is reported but again, that doesn't mean more human trafficking is happening.
Unless the reporting rates go down, then it must certainly does.
Refer back to my example about covid case reporting.
Your example of a concerted effort of large governmental agencies to hide the actual reported numbers is not actually relevant here. It wouldn't even be relevant if it were just random underreporting outside of governments as it doesn't have any similarity to decriminalizing sex work.
Incorrectly citing Occam's Razor doesn't strengthen your argument.
You have made more assumptions than I have. Tell me how you think Occam doesn't apply. You can't just declare an argument to be invalid and expect anyone to take your seriously.
What evidence do you have to support your theory that decriminalizing an activity increases the rate of reporting? If you don't have any, then you don't even have an argument. You only have your suppositions and theories.
It's entirely possible that you're correct, and decriminalization increases reporting without increasing activity. I have yet to see what mechanism you propose causes this quite curious paradox, so without some explanation you'll have to concede that you at least can offer no actual reason to believe it's true.
Because one of the biggest issues with sex work, human trafficking, gets worse with legalization.
Yes, because legalizing sex work is just criminalizing sex work with extra steps. It's very easy to see an (alleged) "rise in sex trafficking" when the legalization shuffle allows politicians to all of a sudden decide what is "allowed" sex work and what is "sex trafficking."
This is why shitty studies like the one you linked is so thoroughly non-credible - it was performed without the input of the people who actually know what they are talking about - ie, sex workers themselves.
What the fuck are you talking about?
legalizing sex work is just criminalizing sex work with extra steps
So what's the solution?? You just made random assertions without any sources and didn't suggest any alternatives. All while skimming over the very real trafficking/coersion problems unique to sex work.
I was totally onboard with them but the longer they talk the weirder the takes get.
ROFLMAO! No, genius... trafficking is not unique to sex work in any way, shape, or form. If you weren't filled to the brim with anti-sex work hysteria you'd have known that already.
Do tell… is this the first time you’ve actually considered what sex workers themselves have to say about (so-called) “legalization?”
The sex workers with those opinions usually are the already more well off workers who perform escort or cam services, and isn't reflective of the bottom strata of sex worker experiences. It also doesn't address how more common sex work leads to higher trafficking rates.
trafficking is not unique to sex work in any way, shape, or form.
Lol I'd love any source on this whatsoever. I'm not sure how you defend this line of thought, or why you feel this way. You don't think human trafficking shares any of the same risk factors or conditions as sex work?
ROFLMAO!
LOLCOPTER
and isn’t reflective of the bottom strata of sex worker experiences.
You're going to have to do a whole lot better than hiding behind impoverished people.
It also doesn’t address how more common sex work leads to higher trafficking rates.
That has already been explained to you.
Lol I’d love any source on this whatsoever.
You need a source to tell you that labor and refugee trafficking is a thing?
I’m not sure how you defend this line of thought,
It's really simple... I have no wish to demonize and criminalize sex workers - unlike you.
My bet is on America's conservative puritan history where anything good is bad.
Also sex trafficking. At least that's the argument for keeping it illegal. :(
I believe the reason sex trafficking happens is because sex work is illegal.
Which is bollocks anyways because illegalization actually makes things less safe for all sex workers, but especially for trafficking victims who are now legally marginalized into dark number status
Old white men elected themselves under the guise of voting (gerrymandering who?) and are too embarrassed and confused to allow women the rights they have as humans. Isn't democracy silly.
I'd say the diagram of "Why is sex work illegal" and "Why is abortion illegal" is almost a perfect circle.
It's about contolling other peoples' bodies and weakening the separation of church and state.
AFAIK, it's not federally illegal, but mostly every state bans it. As how Nevada can have prostitution.
You're correct, it is not federally illegal in the US. Most things aren't. Murder isn't, either. However, traveling across state lines with a prostitute has gotten people in trouble with the federal government before.
Sex work differs from most other type of work in one very significant way - it's an industry in which capitalists cannot really control the means of production unless slavery (ie, a person can become the private property of another) is legalized and institutionalized. In other words, a sex worker - for the most part - is not as easily coerced into selling their labor to capitalists like most workers can be, and capitalists hate when people have a way to opt out of being hosts for their parasitism.
Sex work also has a way of subverting patriarchal norms upon which the status quo rests.
This is not to say that sex work is automatically a revolutionary, anti-capitalist or even "empowering" thing by itself - there are plenty of ways in which our socio-economic systems allows and enables de facto slavery without calling it slavery - but it certainly doesn't fit into the neat class hierarchy that capitalists wants society to be trapped within.
Sex work also has a way of subverting patriarchal norms upon which the status quo rests.
cough, what? No, it reinforces those norms. Men in power get to have women at their beck and call.
This isn't a capitalist thing. Just look at how profitable the sex industry is in Nevada.
It's a "holier than thou" thing that we just haven't been able to get rid of in our society.
As much as I like calling out greed for what it is, this simply isn't one of those cases.
cough, what?
You read correctly the first time. It's a lot more difficult to entrap sex workers in patriarchal hierarchies than a housewife (for instance)... this should not be too difficult to understand.
This isn’t a capitalist thing.
All sex work in the world today exists under a capitalist mode of production - as far as I can tell, there is (officially, at least) no such thing as "publicly-funded" sex work... and that is unfortunate.
as far as I can tell, there is (officially, at least) no such thing as "publicly-funded" sex work... and that is unfortunate.
You lost me.
Due to both criminalization and demonization, sex workers are prevented from performing very necessary work in our society - such as being the only people that are qualified to perform sex education, for instance - so yes... it is quite unfortunate that sex work cannot be performed as a service to the public.
Sex education is more about the changes your body goes through during puberty as well as how reproduction works. None of that is related to sex work. Sex work is about making people feel good.
Sex education is more about the changes your body goes through during puberty as well as how reproduction works.
That's basic biology - not sex education. The fact that you can't even discern the difference proves the point.
That's what I was taught in sex ed. What were you taught?
I think that is the problem.
Not even that.
Yikes.
Wait till you learn that you can be self employed outside of sex work.
For the most parts its just christian morality still ingrained in our society.
Wait till you learn that you can be self employed outside of sex work.
Yes, the homeless people trying to sell me trinkets at the intersection certainly seems to prove your point.
The only self employed people you can think of are homeless dudes selling trinkets and prostitutes?
The vast majority of "self-employed" people are utterly impoverished people doing survival work, Clyde - please tell me you don't buy into the "entrepreneurship" fairy tales Reagan and Thatcher spooned into your parents' brains through the telly back in the 80s. If you believed that, you might just as well believe in magic glass slippers that grants royalty.
You are confusing being self employed with gig economy bullshit. There are a lot of fields of occupation where being self employed makes sense und gives you more freedom. By the way - I'm talking from own experience being self employed fore quite some time now.
There are people living in shacks within a kilometer from where I'm typing this, Clyde... every second person living there has more (so-called) "entrepreneurship" in their big toe than you have in your entire body because they literally have to do it for survival.
I'm not confusing squat... the only thing you've managed to demonstrate here is that you talk from privilege and nothing else.
I like how even you write “entrepreneurship” in quotation marks and ad "so called", but than dismiss my point completely, that we might not be talking about the same thing. And than you get personal for no reason. Is everything OK, buddy? You need to went some anger and frustration? I would recommend some physical activity - much better than arguing with strangers on the internet.
I like how even you write “entrepreneurship” in quotation marks and ad “so called”
That's because I view the neoliberal fetishization of "entrepreneurism" no differently than I view the garbage anti-vaxxers and flat-earthers buy into.
but than dismiss my point completely
Your "point" was treated in the appropriate manner - your "point" merely revolved around the choice the privileged has when it comes to employment. This makes your "point" utterly irrelevant to this discussion.
Ah, to be a angry maximalist teenager again - sorry for bothering you, but that conversations almost feels illegal to me.
maximalist
I have no idea what "maximalism" is... but I sincerely doubt there's anything illegal about it.
I disagree with this entire claim. Sex workers are notorious for "having a price" to do nearly anything. I would say they are more susceptible to doing disgusting shit for money. There's a reason why there's an ongoing joke about sex workers getting shit on during their trips to dubai.
Sex workers are notorious for “having a price” to do nearly anything.
And what do you think the rest of us do, eh Clyde? How many sex workers have to piss in bottles to make Jeff Bezos richer?
There's a reason we don't use the term "prostitute" any more - it's got something to do with the fact that understanding how capitalism works very quickly makes it real clear who the real "prostitutes" are...
I think sex workers are pressured to get into progressively more disgusting shit because that's what pays. The market is flooded at this point and the only thing you can do to stick out is either be famous or be willing to degrade yourself.
I think
You think?
And this expertise on sex work comes from where?
I'm expressing my opinion on a public forum. I hate how internet comments have become an eternal game of gotchas. I can be aware of a topic without participating in it.
Is your opinion an informed one? Or are you just regurgitating propaganda you assume to be your opinion?
It means staying awake, staying aware and thinking, not sleepwalking through life.
Implies the use of critical thinking. No wonder they hate it.
I have an MSc from a top UK university, my dissertation topic was labour abuse and work-related harm for which I received a distinction. I'm no puritan, but genuine "sex work" (outside the internet) is overwhelmingly negative for the actual workers and very few enter the industry from a position of personal or economic empowerment. This is the case to a shocking degree, even where it's decriminalised. I'm not against it, per se, but it confuses me when people are strongly for it. So yeah, stay woke.
I think most people who've actually thought about it would say either "sensitivity to and awareness of the plight of marginalized people" or the same but with "oversensitivity", depending on which side of it you're on.
Why is sex work even illegal in the first place.
Selling is legal, fucking is legal, why isn't selling fucking legal?
-- George Carlin
Seas he also the fella that said “Getting paid for sex is illegal… UNLESS YOU RECORD IT!”
For years I've contemplated the idea if I came into a bunch of money if starting a porn studio where the customer is an actor/actress in the porn.
We have a building and several "sets" with cameras recording, customer picks their "partner" and "set" and "shoot the porn", after they are done the video is burned on to a dvd(or blue ray or potentially put on a private file server).
The customer isn't paying for sex, they are paying for the video.
Pretty sure it would have a ton of legal push back and I would need a lot of money for the lawyers to fight the cases.
But 1. Safer for everyone imvolved(it's video taped so you won't beat/hurt/kill the other party) 2.technically legal just like shooting porn
This is actually a great idea for couples! The issue of course would be to make sure that the couples are actual couples.
You could have them sign a release indicating that it's a "photo studio", and you can have different prices: one for commercial use ($5,000 per hour) and one for private use ($100 an hour, and you're not allowed to commercially distribute the DVD.)
Think there is a big group of customers for sex who want it captured on video?
You could burn it to a dvd or whatever, delete the file, and give the customer the only copy. Whether they choose to keep it or destroy it is their own choice.
They get the only copy... I don't care if the watch it, post it online or just it for skeet shooting with a shotgun.
Not to mention the possible tie ins...imagine if the studio partnered with onlyfans... Or offered special spaces with live streaming(with permission) to people's Webcam sites.
"remember to join the stream this Saturday where we will be on location in the pleasure dome's sunset beach set for a special sex on the beach adventure"
The underlying assumption is the same as in abortion: that women can't be entrusted with agency over their own bodies.
Because one of the biggest issues with sex work, human trafficking, gets worse with legalization. Studies across Europe have shown that countries that outlaw prostitution see a decrease in human trafficking victims while countries that legalized or decriminalized it see an increase.
Unlike with drugs, you don't just create a way to increase the supply. A very small minority of women actually want to engage in sex work. And the few who do, usually envision the high class escort lifestyle. But working in a brothel charging $100 per client isn't something many want to do.
But legalizing prostitution increases demand. Which makes it more profitable for criminals to utilize human trafficking to fill that demand.
https://orgs.law.harvard.edu/lids/2014/06/12/does-legalized-prostitution-increase-human-trafficking/
One source of it.
It also doesn't help at all with protecting victims of human trafficking. Victims of human trafficking are already protected. But they don't step forward because of threats against their own well being and that of their families. Something that doesn't change just because their work technically is legal now.
Which leaves a small percentage of people who fall into financial hardship and consider prostitution as a method of overcoming said hardship. For them that might slightly improve their situation. But that still means exploiting vulnerable people and isn't people engaging in sex work because they want to. And it's even questionable if people in these scenarios would follow the legal way.
So while initially it might seem like legalizing it solves a lot of issues, it is more difficult than that.
Us laws regarding sex work are firmly based in puritanical values not out of any concern whatsoever regarding trafficking.
Thanks for the data. I think the issue here is not that legal prostitution creates problems, but rather the government bodies being incompetent at protecting the victims, then.
There are other industries in which people "sell their bodies" for profit (the military and construction come to mind), and if those can be quite regulated, why can't prostitution?
We all sell our bodies for profit. To be fair though, wage theft is the most common form of theft. We're all prostitutes and we're almost all being taken advantage of, and we're in a system where we can't really get out.
I see this single study trotted out every time the subject comes up and the key factor to take into account is that this is reported trafficking. If legalized sex work means more light is shed on human trafficking that means more can be done about it.
Just because more is reported doesn't mean more isn't also happening. In fact, one could reasonably expect reporting to go down as a percentage of incidents due to ordinary citizens not expecting sex workers to be involved in trafficking since sex work is now legal. That the number goes up after the stigma is removed seems to strongly indicate a correlation with a rise in actual trafficking.
More or less is a matter of comparison. How do you compare with an underground activity that cannot be tracked as easily?
As with anything, you can only work with the data you actually have.
Sure, but all you have is assumptions and you're assuming the increased reporting of trafficking means that trafficking is increasing rather than it just getting caught more. It's like when some governments fought over covid reporting. Keeping it hidden doesn't mean less of it is happening and making it more visible doesn't mean more of it is happening.
Isn't that a bit of the pot calling the kettle black?
No, because you presented the study as supposed proof of more human trafficking.
First, I didn't present anything.
Second, it does prove that more human trafficking is reported.
You only have the assumption that bringing it into the light of day results in a higher rate of reporting against actual incidents. It's an interesting hypothesis, but without any evidence to support your assumption Occam's Razor dictates that the simplest answer is that the rates do not change drastically and there actually is more human trafficking to be reported.
You didn't present anything but you certainly act like you did. We're agreed in that it proves more human trafficking is reported but again, that doesn't mean more human trafficking is happening. Refer back to my example about covid case reporting. Incorrectly citing Occam's Razor doesn't strengthen your argument.
I did no such thing.
Unless the reporting rates go down, then it must certainly does.
Your example of a concerted effort of large governmental agencies to hide the actual reported numbers is not actually relevant here. It wouldn't even be relevant if it were just random underreporting outside of governments as it doesn't have any similarity to decriminalizing sex work.
You have made more assumptions than I have. Tell me how you think Occam doesn't apply. You can't just declare an argument to be invalid and expect anyone to take your seriously.
What evidence do you have to support your theory that decriminalizing an activity increases the rate of reporting? If you don't have any, then you don't even have an argument. You only have your suppositions and theories.
It's entirely possible that you're correct, and decriminalization increases reporting without increasing activity. I have yet to see what mechanism you propose causes this quite curious paradox, so without some explanation you'll have to concede that you at least can offer no actual reason to believe it's true.
Yes, because legalizing sex work is just criminalizing sex work with extra steps. It's very easy to see an (alleged) "rise in sex trafficking" when the legalization shuffle allows politicians to all of a sudden decide what is "allowed" sex work and what is "sex trafficking."
This is why shitty studies like the one you linked is so thoroughly non-credible - it was performed without the input of the people who actually know what they are talking about - ie, sex workers themselves.
What the fuck are you talking about?
So what's the solution?? You just made random assertions without any sources and didn't suggest any alternatives. All while skimming over the very real trafficking/coersion problems unique to sex work.
I was totally onboard with them but the longer they talk the weirder the takes get.
Do tell... is this the first time you've actually considered what sex workers themselves have to say about (so-called) "legalization?"
None of this is a secret, Clyde.
ROFLMAO! No, genius... trafficking is not unique to sex work in any way, shape, or form. If you weren't filled to the brim with anti-sex work hysteria you'd have known that already.
The sex workers with those opinions usually are the already more well off workers who perform escort or cam services, and isn't reflective of the bottom strata of sex worker experiences. It also doesn't address how more common sex work leads to higher trafficking rates.
Lol I'd love any source on this whatsoever. I'm not sure how you defend this line of thought, or why you feel this way. You don't think human trafficking shares any of the same risk factors or conditions as sex work?
LOLCOPTER
You're going to have to do a whole lot better than hiding behind impoverished people.
That has already been explained to you.
You need a source to tell you that labor and refugee trafficking is a thing?
It's really simple... I have no wish to demonize and criminalize sex workers - unlike you.
Puritan values.
My bet is on America's conservative puritan history where anything good is bad.
Also sex trafficking. At least that's the argument for keeping it illegal. :(
I believe the reason sex trafficking happens is because sex work is illegal.
Which is bollocks anyways because illegalization actually makes things less safe for all sex workers, but especially for trafficking victims who are now legally marginalized into dark number status
Old white men elected themselves under the guise of voting (gerrymandering who?) and are too embarrassed and confused to allow women the rights they have as humans. Isn't democracy silly.
I'd say the diagram of "Why is sex work illegal" and "Why is abortion illegal" is almost a perfect circle.
It's about contolling other peoples' bodies and weakening the separation of church and state.
AFAIK, it's not federally illegal, but mostly every state bans it. As how Nevada can have prostitution.
You're correct, it is not federally illegal in the US. Most things aren't. Murder isn't, either. However, traveling across state lines with a prostitute has gotten people in trouble with the federal government before.
Sex work differs from most other type of work in one very significant way - it's an industry in which capitalists cannot really control the means of production unless slavery (ie, a person can become the private property of another) is legalized and institutionalized. In other words, a sex worker - for the most part - is not as easily coerced into selling their labor to capitalists like most workers can be, and capitalists hate when people have a way to opt out of being hosts for their parasitism.
Sex work also has a way of subverting patriarchal norms upon which the status quo rests.
This is not to say that sex work is automatically a revolutionary, anti-capitalist or even "empowering" thing by itself - there are plenty of ways in which our socio-economic systems allows and enables de facto slavery without calling it slavery - but it certainly doesn't fit into the neat class hierarchy that capitalists wants society to be trapped within.
cough, what? No, it reinforces those norms. Men in power get to have women at their beck and call.
This isn't a capitalist thing. Just look at how profitable the sex industry is in Nevada.
It's a "holier than thou" thing that we just haven't been able to get rid of in our society.
As much as I like calling out greed for what it is, this simply isn't one of those cases.
You read correctly the first time. It's a lot more difficult to entrap sex workers in patriarchal hierarchies than a housewife (for instance)... this should not be too difficult to understand.
All sex work in the world today exists under a capitalist mode of production - as far as I can tell, there is (officially, at least) no such thing as "publicly-funded" sex work... and that is unfortunate.
You lost me.
Due to both criminalization and demonization, sex workers are prevented from performing very necessary work in our society - such as being the only people that are qualified to perform sex education, for instance - so yes... it is quite unfortunate that sex work cannot be performed as a service to the public.
Sex education is more about the changes your body goes through during puberty as well as how reproduction works. None of that is related to sex work. Sex work is about making people feel good.
That's basic biology - not sex education. The fact that you can't even discern the difference proves the point.
That's what I was taught in sex ed. What were you taught?
I think that is the problem.
Not even that.
Yikes.
Wait till you learn that you can be self employed outside of sex work.
For the most parts its just christian morality still ingrained in our society.
Yes, the homeless people trying to sell me trinkets at the intersection certainly seems to prove your point.
The only self employed people you can think of are homeless dudes selling trinkets and prostitutes?
The vast majority of "self-employed" people are utterly impoverished people doing survival work, Clyde - please tell me you don't buy into the "entrepreneurship" fairy tales Reagan and Thatcher spooned into your parents' brains through the telly back in the 80s. If you believed that, you might just as well believe in magic glass slippers that grants royalty.
You are confusing being self employed with gig economy bullshit. There are a lot of fields of occupation where being self employed makes sense und gives you more freedom. By the way - I'm talking from own experience being self employed fore quite some time now.
There are people living in shacks within a kilometer from where I'm typing this, Clyde... every second person living there has more (so-called) "entrepreneurship" in their big toe than you have in your entire body because they literally have to do it for survival.
I'm not confusing squat... the only thing you've managed to demonstrate here is that you talk from privilege and nothing else.
I like how even you write “entrepreneurship” in quotation marks and ad "so called", but than dismiss my point completely, that we might not be talking about the same thing. And than you get personal for no reason. Is everything OK, buddy? You need to went some anger and frustration? I would recommend some physical activity - much better than arguing with strangers on the internet.
That's because I view the neoliberal fetishization of "entrepreneurism" no differently than I view the garbage anti-vaxxers and flat-earthers buy into.
Your "point" was treated in the appropriate manner - your "point" merely revolved around the choice the privileged has when it comes to employment. This makes your "point" utterly irrelevant to this discussion.
Ah, to be a angry maximalist teenager again - sorry for bothering you, but that conversations almost feels illegal to me.
I have no idea what "maximalism" is... but I sincerely doubt there's anything illegal about it.
I disagree with this entire claim. Sex workers are notorious for "having a price" to do nearly anything. I would say they are more susceptible to doing disgusting shit for money. There's a reason why there's an ongoing joke about sex workers getting shit on during their trips to dubai.
And what do you think the rest of us do, eh Clyde? How many sex workers have to piss in bottles to make Jeff Bezos richer?
There's a reason we don't use the term "prostitute" any more - it's got something to do with the fact that understanding how capitalism works very quickly makes it real clear who the real "prostitutes" are...
I think sex workers are pressured to get into progressively more disgusting shit because that's what pays. The market is flooded at this point and the only thing you can do to stick out is either be famous or be willing to degrade yourself.
You think?
And this expertise on sex work comes from where?
I'm expressing my opinion on a public forum. I hate how internet comments have become an eternal game of gotchas. I can be aware of a topic without participating in it.
Is your opinion an informed one? Or are you just regurgitating propaganda you assume to be your opinion?
Yes.
woke af
What does woke even mean?
It means staying awake, staying aware and thinking, not sleepwalking through life.
Implies the use of critical thinking. No wonder they hate it.
I have an MSc from a top UK university, my dissertation topic was labour abuse and work-related harm for which I received a distinction. I'm no puritan, but genuine "sex work" (outside the internet) is overwhelmingly negative for the actual workers and very few enter the industry from a position of personal or economic empowerment. This is the case to a shocking degree, even where it's decriminalised. I'm not against it, per se, but it confuses me when people are strongly for it. So yeah, stay woke.
I think most people who've actually thought about it would say either "sensitivity to and awareness of the plight of marginalized people" or the same but with "oversensitivity", depending on which side of it you're on.
Goodness knows.