Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why are sex workers forced to wear a financial scarlet letter?

thewalrus.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 511 posts

Re: Why are sex workers forced to wear a financial scarlet letter?

#391

Post by micromacrofoot »

daniel-cussen wrote: post #367
micromacrofoot wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legitimizing the industry helps make cases of coercion more obvious, as people gain more legitimate means to report things without self-incrimination. Physical laborers rent out their bodies in a way that often causes permanent damage. It's literally degrading their bodies. Some construction workers live with chronic pain for their entire lives. There's a psychological component as well, which is more vulnerable in s…

PART I So with military work, it's not about being required to kill as much as getting it that the killing needs doing. An overpowered army like the Americans conquering Iraq will induce trauma, but if you're outnumbered and alone, and you win? In my case unarmed. Five times, Thursday was my first 4-on-1, not a scratch. They threw a rock at me, 505 grams (I just weighed it), it hit a lamppost. Holy shit, screamed at…

Do you have someone in your life that you trust that you can talk to?

Re: Why are sex workers forced to wear a financial scarlet letter?

#392

Post by dylan604 »

giantg2 wrote: post #208
arcticfox wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like 3% vs 12%

That's pretty high, but not astronomical.

Not astronomical? That could be the entire profit margin for some lines of business. Granted, maybe not the adult entertainment business specifically. Just food for thought on how high %12 could be

Re: Why are sex workers forced to wear a financial scarlet letter?

#393

Post by lkslkdjfsl »

BlargMcLarg wrote: post #228
lkslkdjfsl wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The army has always been glorified as a country without soldiers is free pickings That is your own conlcusion. Historically armies were "staffed" by nobles. You couldn't be a soldier if you didn't have land or title, so it started out as something of prestigious and exclusive (as an alternative explanation why it was/is glorified). My point isn't that we should see sex work as important as being a soldier (though t…

>That is your own conlcusion. Historically armies were "staffed" by nobles If you as a man weren't willing to fight, be it the army or your home, good luck attracting a mate for most of history. Similar dynamics exist today. >why is sex work different? Already answered. History and cultural virtues. >Who is we? The far majority of your male and female ancestors, for one. The majority of cultures globally, for two. >I…

> If you as a man weren't willing to fight, be it the army or your home, good luck attracting a mate for most of history

Most men, for significant parts of history, weew explicitly excluded from joining the army (e.g. Roman armies were only "staffed" by citizens). Where are you getting the idea that most men had to fight at home? Do you have any relevant sources for this?

> The vast majority of men aren't attracted to promiscuous women looking for the next meal ticket.

Ew. I generally prefer not to pass judgement, but this is an unpleasant turn of phrase in the exposition of your idea.

> No amount of reasoning changes dynamics that have existed for millions of years

Anatomically modern humans have only been around for ~300k years, civilisation ~5k. What millions of years of dynamics are you talking about exactly?

Examples of reasoning changing dynamics that have "existed for millions of years:"

- Money - Democracy - Contracts - etc.

> what sex workers and their clientele resemble

What do they resemble to you? Is this a modern conception or one that has existed for millions of years?

Re: Why are sex workers forced to wear a financial scarlet letter?

#395

Post by lkslkdjfsl »

micromacrofoot wrote: post #327
BlargMcLarg wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sex isn't a necessity the same way geopolitically showing you'll fight back the moment someone decides to invite your country is. Laws and mandatory drafts reflect this. Despite being recognized as a necessity in many countries (mine included), you won't get subsidy or sexual assistance as an otherwise capable individual. For obvious reasons, this affects guys the most (the problems for women come after, generally).…

Honestly I think this weird binary comparison of a country's need for a military to an individual's need for sex (and/or other intimacy) has run its course... this isn't really making sense to me anymore, and it's off course from the original context. To try to bring things back from this extreme tangent; my point was that on an individual level, trauma from sex work is no worse than trauma people face on the front l…

> trauma from sex work is no worse than trauma people face on the front lines, yet one is acceptable and one's not. That's a somewhat arbitrary construct.

Thank you for distilling this.

Re: Why are sex workers forced to wear a financial scarlet letter?

#396

Post by SpicyLemonZest »

Volundr wrote: post #381
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't agree. A society where prostitution is welcomed and celebrated is very different than one where it's not, and it's entirely reasonable for me to say I'd like to live in the second kind of society. You mention cars, so I'd point to muffler mandates as a good analogy - an un-muffled car won't rob anyone or burn down your house, but because they're loud and annoying they've been prohibited.

Tobacco is tolerated, not celebrated. There is a large gap between someone's vices being no one's business and actively celebrating them.

If you enjoy the status quo on tobacco, the people you have to thank for it are strong, dedicated anti-smoking advocates who think smoking is absolutely their business and would happily ban it if that were politically feasible. It used to be that smoking was celebrated and as a consequence happened everywhere. Stepping into a restaurant, bar, or airplane meant breathing in clouds of cigarette smoke. Smokers at the time would argue, quite passionately, that because their vices are none of your business it's unfair to try and drive smoking out of public life.

I'm torn on whether it should be completely illegal, because I've seen some kinda persuasive arguments in the direction of decriminalization. In particular, you don't want people who do sex work to feel like they can't get help without going to jail. But I'm confident that "ban it all" is much closer to the truth than "none of our business".

Re: Why are sex workers forced to wear a financial scarlet letter?

#397

Post by dbingham »

mind-blight wrote: post #325
dbingham wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am of the opinion that the solution is Free Market Socialism: a market economy where the businesses are governed by their workers. Capital is allowed a reasonable, regulated return on its investment (which takes the form of loans, not equity) and further financing can happen through crowd funding (since this system would naturally result in a much more even distribution of capital, an order of magnitude more people…

> Unions become completely unnecessary in this system. I don't think that's true. Unions exist to negotiate working conditions with management. Management doesn't disappear in the system that you're describing. Some of the incentives for poor working conditions disappear, but not all of them. There are non-profits that have unionized due to worker abuses. Ironically, I've worked in VC-backed startups most of my caree…

Non-profits aren't usually governed by their workers. They're usually governed by an elected or appointed board.

What I'm describing is a system in which all businesses become what are currently known as "worker cooperatives". In that system, if management produces conditions that the workers don't like, the workers vote management out.

I'm not aware of any worker cooperatives that have unionized, though I believe Mondragon (one of the biggest, oldest, and most successful worker cooperatives) does have what amounts to a multicameral system with one of the councils filling the roll of the union in advocating for line workers. [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mondragon_Corporation

Re: Why are sex workers forced to wear a financial scarlet letter?

#398

Post by MichaelCollins »

zmgsabst wrote: post #323
UncleMeat wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure it is this. Instead, I think it is that conservatives think that sex work is fundamentally immoral and that therefore it cannot be accepted by society, regardless of any harm or benefit created by this policy. It isn't "hey we believe that sex workers fundamentally cannot be protected from abuse" like something like child labor but is instead "sex work is moral degeneracy and must be stopped."

You’re not following their logic through: “Moral degeneracy” is a problem (in their view) because of the associated harms — which we’ve learned over time and encoded into our traditions. That things they call “moral degeneracy” fundamentally are harmful to a healthy society and to the people involved. That is, they think sex work is harmful to the people who participate and those nearby (eg, children of sex workers).…

> “Moral degeneracy” is a problem (in their view) because of the associated harms

You're assuming the social conservative subscribes to a consequential ethics system. But a social conservative subscribing to deontological ethics is more likely, particularly if they're a religious social conservative.

Re: Why are sex workers forced to wear a financial scarlet letter?

#399

Post by Volundr »

a-user-you-like wrote: post #387
Volundr wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your religion is not my religion. The law should not prevent me from doing things just because you think it'll send me to hell, anymore than the law should force you to practice my religion. If you don't believe in freedom of religion, that's your choice, but it sort of one of the founding principles of the USA.

The founding of the USA had all 13 colonies with state churches. Sure, let’s return to that. Then all the states would outlaw this immoral practice.

And yet the first amendment guarantees freedom of religion and none of these 13 colonies banned prostitution, so it seems your assumption is incorrect.

Re: Why are sex workers forced to wear a financial scarlet letter?

#400

Post by MichaelCollins »

feet wrote: post #347
TremendousJudge wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought they believed sex work is fundamentally sinful and that's why it should be banned. I guess we talked to different conservatives.

Freedom of religion was supposed to be a thing in the US. Sin is not a good reason to make a law that binds those who don't follow the same religion

The first amendment restricts congress, not voters. Voters are free to vote for whatever politician they like for whatever reason they like, including religious reasons. The constitution does not demand that religious citizens demarcate and compartmentalize their religious and civic beliefs when they go to vote.
Post reply on HN