JCC Senate Sex Work: Prostitution, Pornography, etc

Beginning with the following definitions:

Prostitution: the act or practice of engaging in sexual activity for money.
Pornography: the creation of sexually explicit videos, photographs, writings, or the like, whose purpose is to elicit sexual arousal, usually for money.

1. Should both activities be legal in a free society?
2. In most "free" societies, prostitution is illegal, while pornography is not. The only difference between the two is, the presence of a camera (and associated production teams) and the intended audience for gratification. What is the justification for this seemingly arbitrary distinction?

I have personally always felt that both should be legal and subject to protections provided by the justice system and regulation as opposed to subject to the unprotected whims of the black market. This is the case with pornography, though abuses certainly continue to happen in that industry.

 

Hollywood?

 

You make it legal and regulated. Here's a case from a couple of days ago in Sydney; good luck getting something done about assault against sex workers when they're operating illegally.

 

Maybe more of a Senate thread?

But yeah, I agree with you, @Souderwan. It's an arbitrary distinction for another victimless "crime." There should be some regulation, but it should be legal. For the same reason I support legalizing marijuana, and generally phasing away all of the other victimless "crimes." Reasonable regulation is good, outright bans aren't.

 

The casting couch? Or failed actresses/actors?

 

I feel legalization is the low-hanging fruit, and the easy place to have this conversation.

Plenty of things both awful and excellent are legal. The more substantive discussion is trying to reflect on the social value and meaning of the activities we engage in. I noted in my earlier post how many problems exist in sex work that are unlikely to be influenced by its legalization or lack thereof. Along the same lines, I'd note this article from Der Spiegel about the German experience with legalization.

For my money, that still seems quite exploitative of poor women and often dehumanizing besides. Legalization can certainly be part of the discussion. But it's not a panacea, and there are considerable negative externalities.

 

Why not both?

 

There are plenty of jobs that can be described that way. Obviously you try to minimise inequality within the economy, but that's a separate issue.

 

I think the problem with the German experiment, much like with Amsterdam, is that it's one-of-a-kind for hundreds of miles in any direction. It's illegal everywhere else so the labor market floods to legal location. This creates an environment ripe for worker exploitation unless the government intervenes to adequately protect worker rights.

But most of the problems highlighted in that article you posted @Jabba-wocky, would fade away if legal prostitution was ubiquitous. As it is, because the labor pool is over saturated with willing sex workers, they lack sufficient bargaining power to set the terms of their employment. Same problem currently exists in pornography today.

Two solutions to this, in my mind:
1. Make legal sex work as ubiquitous as the free market will allow.
2. Establish reasonable regulations to protect sex workers. (A few that come to mind: Sex workers should net at least 80% (or something high like that) of every sale, health insurance and regular screenings, free condoms, etc)

But I definitely agree that legalization isn't a panacea for the problems sex workers face. It is the simply the necessary first step. Most of us have no real understanding of the dangers they face, in large part, because they are dis-incentivized to report the harm done to them in the conduct of their work precisely because it's illegal.

Edit:

I tagged it as JCC and Senate (I think?). I haven't quite figured out the format changes. I honestly have no strong feelings on the tagging. Happy to adjust per mod direction.

 

That's certainly some of what's at play. On the other hand, I still there are still some extremely serious shortcomings here. For instance, I don't know how one designs a resort explicitly premised on treating women the way the Beaches hotel franchise treats food and water sports without it being tremendously objectifying. That's not a problem that markets are even designed to address.

 

The problem is that sex work is going to happen. So do you want similar problems to the ones created by the "war on drugs" where everyone gets a worse deal, or do you want to actually help people stay safe in those situations? Would you rather objectification or objectification plus other bad stuff?

 

I see where Wocky is coming from in terms of sex work being an avenue to increase the objectification of women in general. Honestly this is why I personally don't like porn, because I don't like the idea that men have fetishized every type of daily situation.

However, legality is a totally different issue. I still think both should be legal.

 

Part of the reason why it's objectifying is the negative social stigma surrounding sex work. It's considered a low form of work, and one that one should feel ashamed for partaking in. Because of this, women engaged in it are only viewed within two prisms: either having no self-respect as a result of internalised misogyny, or as victims of circumstance. Neither of these views afford any agency to the woman. This also extends to porn actors, where even otherwise liberal and progressive people find it perfectly acceptable to belittle and demean people, men or women, who work in that industry. It's considered a shameful line of work. It doesn't take a genius to understand that looking down on a group of people contributes to their dehumanisation, which in turn facilitates objectification, and makes it unlikely that malpractice and abusive conditions are reported in the first place.

If society quits treating it as socially acceptable to feel superior to your fellow human because they're in these professions, then the negative stigma and shame will dissipate. Obviously, I won't deny that there's an inherent objectification to professions related to commodifying the human body, but models also commodify the human body, and yet are revered and idolised. People realise that models also have a life outside the frame, even though their job literally is to be captured on camera as a commodity frozen in time. If the negative stigma attached to sex work disappears, maybe people can begin to see sex workers and people in porn in the same way: as people employed in professions where they inhabit a role for their work, but who are not defined solely by that work.

 

In truth I believe that’s the lesser part of the equation. As with blackface, many of the roles themselves have potential to do tremendous negative value to the cultural discourse. This is true regardless of how people fare offscreen, because media has its own cultural power. I strain to think of another genre that markets itself so openly and aggressively on being intentionally demeaning to others (not to say all sex work is this way, but it’s proportionally more prevalent than in other forms of entertainment.).

Similarly, my invocation of football was quite deliberate. Things can be respected, enjoyable, legally regulated, and nonetheless quite dangerous.

 

Porn is great.

 

I know that "being victimized by serial killers" isn't necessarily the number one concern of sex workers, but after reading a book about Robert Pickton, the real takeaway for me was the lives of heroin addicts in Vancouver. It seems like the penultimate destination for virtually all female heroin addicts in Vancouver is sex work and thieving, basically the only way to keep a roof over their heads after their addiction has driven away all other options. I'm reasonably confident Vancouver isn't the only place in the world where that's true.

I'm also reasonably confident that the vast majority of sex workers are falling near the human trafficking/desperate drug addict end of the scale rather than the somewhat glamorized "The Girlfriend Experience" end of the scale, though the high end market clearly really does exist. For the majority of sex workers, it's absurd to think of it as an informed "career choice." I'd agree that legalization doesn't solve all or most of their problems. But if you can't eradicate it, then I'm for anything that can improve their lives, even at the margin, including in particular access to STD screenings and health services, support from the police and community service providers in keeping them from being beat up and otherwise any more abused than the nature of sex work already implies...anything that might make their lives a bit healthier and safer.

 

The issue against legalization for either is usually the same everywhere: politicians and the people they "answer to". Hypocritical 'Murkan religious and family-minded individuals or groups always get their panties in a bunch of such talk of legalization of filthy flesh vice is discussed and will proceed to lambast their nearest politico if they're in favor of it. Regardless of their own behind-closed-doors depraved and deviant fetishes.

As @Artoo-Dion stated, sex work is always going to happen. It is the oldest profession for a reason. Some folks will get into it for whichever personal reason, regardless of how demeaning or dehumanizing it may be for them or others. It's illegality allows many to profit obscenely off it like any other illicit trade, also regardless of consequences to their "employees". So, it might as well be legalized, regulated, insured and taxed once and for all. But maybe that'll take another hundred or so years when we have a new generation bounded more by common sense and less by the words of hypocrite prudes.

 

Although both porn and prostitution are "sex work," I consider them to be substantially different. The main difference is, of course, that porn has all paid performers who have ostensibly gone through vetting including STD testing, treat each other with a level of respect, and know the rules including nuances of "consent." Prostitution is a random scumbag-- usually a man-- paying another person(s) for sex.

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with porn and it should be legal, but legalization hasn't prevented the industry from being deeply toxic (promoting misogyny and warped expectations among young men) and abusive including covering up or handwaving STD outbreaks. Although there have been one or two instances so far, the industry is still lacking its own "#MeToo" wave-- in part, I suspect, because people don't take porn performers seriously because lol they have sex on camera for money they can't be sexually assaulted.

Prostitution, I don't know if it should be legal. As @Rylo Ken said, most prostitutes are not and will never be the glamorized self-employed high-end escorts who make big money and can meaningfully discriminate among their clients. I absolutely think prostitutes should be protected, their work should at least be decriminalized so they can't be thrown in jail, and there should be STD testing similar to how jurisdictions have needle exchanges while not legalizing heroin. But I'm deeply ambivalent about it getting the full endorsement of the state because legalization and regulation don't really address the root problems.

Both of them have issues with consent, as @Jabba-wocky kind of touched on. When someone is getting paid for the act and depends on payments for her/his livelihood, I think it removes any certainty regarding "real" consent. I think pornography mitigates this at least by no one being the "John" who's looking just to get off (plus the aforementioned obeying the rule and recognizing the nuances), but it can't get rid of the inherent problem with sex work under our economic system.

And I do not buy the argument that just because prostitution been around a very long time that we must embrace it. Poverty and misogyny (and homophobia) have been around a very long time too and they feed right into it.

 

I think mostly what I mean about prostitution being legal is that women and men who engage in it shouldn't be punished. That's the thing I don't like about it, because many of those folks have issues that push them to prostitution and that shouldn't be punished. That just makes their situation worse.

But there are some men and women who are perfectly happy being prostitutes, and then I feel it's not my business, even if I disagree with it or wouldn't do it myself.

But porn definitely worries me as a woman because of the previously discussed issue about fetishization. If people can keep their fantasy and real life separate, fine. But I do think sometimes those porn fetishes spill over into real life and do feed into our societal issue with sexual harassment and assault. I think some men in particular can't understand the difference between the fantasy porn shows them and the way real women actually think and act as independent beings.

 

I think at the end of the day most people are hypocrites when it comes to sex work. I don't think you can ever truly accurately gauge a person's opinion about it. Because the same people who try to declare sex work as some legitimate profession that shouldn't have the social stigmas attached to it that it does, and then further try to demonize other people who do view sex work through that social stigma, would very quickly change their tune if it was their own son or daughter seeking to go into that line of work.

 

I'm not sure if you read any of the posts in this thread. There's more nuance in most people's views than what you appear to be responding to.

If my hypothetical, non-existent son or daughter wanted to go into sex work as it exists today including legal avenues, I would certainly discourage it. I don't think there's anything I said that makes me a hypocrite in that. But I couldn't stop an adult from doing it and I wouldn't disown them or anything.

 

I read all the responses. They're no different from anything else I've read or heard on this topic. If anything, seeing discussions like this just reinforces my opinion. Because the only reason people can even have this discussion and offer nuanced opinions about it in the first place is because it isn't part of their lives. It's easy for anybody to do that when it doesn't affect them, when it's from a distance, when it's what somebody else is doing. Whereas I think a lot these supposed opinions people can have about this matter would be much more frank, curt, and succinct, and probably downright different, if it was their own son or daughter doing it. Which I think negates the discussion from the get-go. Again, not ever truly getting to how people really feel about it. I don't think people can ever be totally truthful about this topic. Because, again, most people's opinions would change drastically if they were referring to someone in their own life and not someone else. So I figure what's the point of even having this discussion when everybody's response is something that isn't what they truly believe.

Maybe hypocrite is the wrong word to use. I guess in that regard I was mainly referring to people who do actually go out and talk about sex work like it's some legitimate profession, emphasizing that those who engage in it willingly should never be judged, and then trying to demonize others who don't agree with them. I don't know, maybe I'm a little jaded. I was doing some painting at my parent's house just last week and spent an entire morning listening to Stormy Daniels and the cast of The View try and explain this to America. So this is thread is timely.

But yea, I don't really care that much. Just wanted to offer that perspective.

 

If my son or daughter were involved in sex work, I'd want them to be safe and protected.

If my son or daughter were in a situation where they were so desperate that they were willing to debase themselves, I'd be upset that society had let them down so badly. But that's a completely separate discussion, unless you see sex work as inherently degrading and exploitative in a way that other work can never be. The phrase "like it's some legitimate profession" tells the whole story, really.

 

And what about people where it is part of their lives? And they think it's a legitimate profession? How are they able to have this discussion?

How do you know it's not part of anyone's life here?

What you're talking about is the difference between being objective and letting personal experience play a factor. Why do you give the latter more weight over the former? Why is feeling better than thinking? Isn't it more fair to be objective and approach the subject dispassionately?

How do you know that most people would change their opinion? And, as Guy said, isn't it perfectly possible to see it as a legitimate profession, but discourage it anyway?

This can apply to many professions. One can discourage it, for a number of reasons (not just moral), while still recognizing that it is a legitimate profession.

 

I don't think prostitution is a "legitimate" profession, but I don't think, for example, banking is either. That doesn't mean prostitutes shouldn't be treated as human beings and protected. I'm not really sure what Motivate is getting at. I wouldn't change my mind just because a loved one is involved, and I don't think others would either.