Backpage Raided, CEO Arrested on Sex-Trafficking Charges

Post by empthought » Sat, Oct 08, 2016, 1:03 PM UTC

pkinsky wrote: post #286

empthought wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, but purchasing it might be. Employers can mitigate their culpability by including health and disability insurance, and workplace condition standards. They typically only do this when required by government regulation, though. And in the end there's a qualitative difference between purchasing access to a person's time and labor, and purchasing access to their mouth, vagina, and anus.

Where would all the sex workers who disagree be without you to tell them how they really feel!

Post by cholantesh » Sat, Oct 08, 2016, 2:11 PM UTC

empthought wrote: post #290

cholantesh wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>it's not that "sex work" is somehow more immoral than other work, it's that the purchase of sex is immoral, shameful, and frankly, pathetic It's morally acceptable to sell a service but not to purchase it? That's asinine.

"It's morally acceptable to be a slave but not to own one? That's asinine." The "economic transaction" model is in almost all cases a fig leaf for the abuse of women, even in jurisdictions where prostitution has been legalized or decriminalized.

Post by empthought » Sat, Oct 08, 2016, 2:33 PM UTC

pkinsky wrote: post #292

empthought wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know; I'm more concerned with the johns hiding behind their hypothetical skirts.

Maybe you can start purifying your soul (because clearly there's some sort of puritanical religious thing going on here) by abstaining from the use of electronic devices: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coltan_mining_and_ethics

Post by pkinsky » Mon, Oct 10, 2016, 4:39 AM UTC

empthought wrote: post #295

pkinsky wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you can start purifying your soul (because clearly there's some sort of puritanical religious thing going on here) by abstaining from the use of electronic devices: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coltan_mining_and_ethics

I'm a materialist and an atheist. Being an atheist doesn't prevent me from seeing how abusive and immoral it is to purchase someone's body from a position of economic and social advantage. In fact, it clarifies the situation greatly; there is no soul separate from the body, so making someone's body the object of economic exchange is literally always participating in human trafficking. The authors at http://www.femini…

Post by 1024core » Tue, Oct 11, 2016, 3:37 AM UTC

tn13 wrote: post #47

1024core wrote: post #21

Why is it that in such cases, the government reaches for the CEO right away; but when Wells Fargo employees open millions of fraudulent accounts, it's not the CEO's fault? If I were to commit identity theft (which is basically what the WF employees did), then I would be facing jail time; why hasn't anyone in WF been charged with criminal fraud yet? Why not the CEO?

> Why is it that in such cases, the government reaches for the CEO right away; War on sex is new War on Drugs. By going after the CEO they are setting a precedent. They want to make sure no investor would invest into something that challenges government authority. Wells Fargo CEO will not be touched for the same reason why big banks get bailouts, Hillary clinton is not in jail and Obama is still a president despite k…