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

461–470 of 511 posts

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

#461

Post by reilly3000 »

BlargMcLarg wrote: post #362
reilly3000 wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True. In fact we’ve made televised “I’m not the father” dancing into a national pastime. The patriarchy mentality our norms are built upon includes blaming women for everything ‘wrong’. Women are blamed for premarital sex. Men are celebrated for their scores. Women are paid less yet have less leisure time. They are the first to blame if anything goes wrong with children, including just bringing them into public space…

Do yourself a favor and read "Self-Made Man". It's obvious you're only seeing this from one side of the coin and lack the perspective of the other side in some kind of crusade. Both sexes have their problems and the status quo causes stigmas for both. To claim women are uniquely seen as "lesser beings" in a developed world is horribly naïve.

Blarg. I read the summary of it, it’s going on my list thx. I grew up with a patriarch mentality and took it into my marriage and business. It’s just plain wrong, it’s effects are severe, and it’s been a long personal journey to relearn and reinterpret stuff.

I’m not on a crusade per se, but I guess I’m at a place where I’m now sharing aggregated angst I’ve heard from women and read about. Men absolutely have unmet needs, and much of that actually comes from patriarchal values.

https://www.nextgenmen.ca/blog/why-patriarchy-hurts-men-too

The phrase “I don’t see color” seems admirable but ultimately was determined by researchers to be one of the strongest indicators of racial bias. It’s a problem because it ignores or denies the struggles that minorities have and do face. It projects a meritocracy where there isn’t one. I’d love to live in a “post-racial” society, but we just don’t. In the same way, “I don’t see gender” or “it’s hard for everyone” is a polite way of lying to yourself and denying the harsh reality that women objectively experience.

I have stats and citations for everything I’ve posted here, but I’m lazy and on my phone. I hope you’ll find that most of my claims easily substantiated, not some naïve diatribe. Hit me up if something I said needs backup.

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

#462

Post by Brian_K_White »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #437
Brian_K_White wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if they did? In what way does this harm you? At one time they said the same thing about exposing any skin at all even at the beach. Every human, yes including children gasp has a body with body parts, so mere exposure to the sight of them and knowledge of their existance is not harmful. Sight of the act of sex is merely more of the same. Kids on farms see it every day from birth. At worst it's perhaps distastefu…

I don't think there can be a rigid distinction between "I don't want to see that" and "actual harm". We can presumably agree that it would be wrong if Google put up posters of naked women all over the office, and that the EEOC is right to prohibit such things as a hostile work environment. But what "actual harm" could you point to beyond the fact that the posters are offensive and people don't want to see them? I und…

It's an interesting idea to follow.

So a buisiness that isn't any of the many that might legitimately have pictures of naked women in their offices or other public spaces where employees have to work, has them.

What makes them a hostile work environment? Hostile or harmful to who, and by what mechanism?

I'll proceed on the assumption that it causes women to feel threatened by the men in the area and/or the owners/managers who installed the posters.

This line of reasoning is essentially the same as blaming women for the rapes they endure because they should have made sure they didn't look attractive to any men, instead of holding men to a standard to be responsible for their actions.

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

#463

Post by kodah »

rurban wrote: post #453
_ktx2 wrote: post #272

The most troubling thing, that is somewhat observable in today's threads, is that ostracizing sex work is almost entirely normalized. People favor legal structures analogous to Don't Ask Don't Tell. This tees up a system of cascading effects: - Sex workers must now navigate a very fluid monetary system. Sex workers must be paid in cash, Bitcoin, etc. Then they have to somehow represent this money to the federal gover…

> Everyone around sex workers are considered criminals. Unknowingly rent a property to a sex worker? You're a criminal. Date a sex worker? Suspected to be a criminal. Lend money to a sex worker? Criminal. Use sex work services? Definitely a criminal. Only in those third world countries where prostitution is still illegal. In the modern world not. https://prostitution.procon.org/countries-and-their-prostitu...

If you feel so confidently in the laws of your country there's a simple exercise you can do: get an escort with the intended purpose of asking them about their experiences. If you feel fear, angst, etc, if you start googling legalities then I think you'll have a better perspective of the intricate web these policies have woven to trap people and accuse them of moral crimes.

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

#464

Post by eric4smith »

OkayPhysicist wrote: post #364
eric4smith wrote: post #319

Ostracizing sex work has always been the case for thousands of years in every successful culture and religion. In fact, cultures that allowed widespread open sex work have always failed. (No, Amsterdam’s red light district is not “widespread”). Just because it’s 2022 does not mean things should automatically change. Even Onlyfans performers, strippers and pr0n stars are openly shunned or relegated to non “wifely” rol…

All cultures, of any kind, have failed. That is the nature of time. Culture is constantly dying and being reformed. So an argument that "All cultures that allowed X have failed" is a really tepid argument. The vast majority of cultures that normalized eating have failed, simply because the vast majority of cultures have failed, period. What differentiates Amsterdam's red light district from OnlyFans' red light distri…

Mmmmm…. You’re very literal here.

It’s clear I mean fail more quickly and easily. Of course everything eventually ends.

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

#465

Post by Volundr »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #407
Volundr wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If someone out there is actively advocating to be able to have sex with a prostitute next to you in a restraunt then I see your point. Otherwise prostitution is already not part of public life.

There are people out there ( https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/08/09/sex-work-... ) advocating for prostitution as a reasonable career path which should be discussed openly with women who feel undervalued or unfulfilled in their current career. I don't think people are gonna start plowing each other in public, but I think there's a very real possibility that in a decade or two it could be considered strang…

> which should be discussed openly with women who feel undervalued or unfulfilled in their current career.

Why shouldn't it be "discussed openly"? Why should a person making a good living in their career not be allowed to discuss it? I'm also not getting where your getting the "women who feel undervalued or unfulfilled in their current career". It seems like your implying she's suggesting we push these women into that work, but that's not supported by your article at all.

And yeah, maybe in 10-years it'll be frowned on to tell people they shouldn't make their money the way they choose. I don't see why it should be anymore acceptable to tell fully grown adults you don't like them making their money on OnlyFans vs say joining the military or starting a risky business.

Poo pooing adult's life decisions uninvited is generally frowned upon. There's no reason we need an exception to this for OnlyFans.

I also now wonder exactly where the line is here. We were talking prostitution now the goalposts have moved to OnlyFans, so I guess nudity for money is now unacceptable? That's a pretty broad line that rules out a lot of modelling and mainstream acting as well.

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

#466

Post by Volundr »

SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #437
Brian_K_White wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if they did? In what way does this harm you? At one time they said the same thing about exposing any skin at all even at the beach. Every human, yes including children gasp has a body with body parts, so mere exposure to the sight of them and knowledge of their existance is not harmful. Sight of the act of sex is merely more of the same. Kids on farms see it every day from birth. At worst it's perhaps distastefu…

I don't think there can be a rigid distinction between "I don't want to see that" and "actual harm". We can presumably agree that it would be wrong if Google put up posters of naked women all over the office, and that the EEOC is right to prohibit such things as a hostile work environment. But what "actual harm" could you point to beyond the fact that the posters are offensive and people don't want to see them? I und…

The harm in your example is that by putting up these posters of naked women being valued only for their body, you send the message that that is how women are seen here. A woman is likely to feel she is at risk of being objectified the same as the women you've put on the wall as literal objects.

I'm confused what the analogous harm is to you when two adults have consensual sex behind closed doors where you can't see or know about it.

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

#467

Post by x86x87 »

bergenty wrote: post #444
x86x87 wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Too easy to be nude? Wtf are you talking about? A lot of tech we have today may not have existed or flourished if not for porn. There needs to be moral policing? No. There is no need for this. Let the market decide. If people want porn give em porn (you need a reality check btw. Most internet traffic is porn. Even today). Also, puritan moralistic misguided people need to get with the program. You don't like it? Don't…

I don’t agree with that. I think the puritans were onto something and I want a partial return to those ideals.

you can disagree with that and you can want whatever.

Let's just hope that the morality police that you want to instate does not disagree with you and bans you out of existence.

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

#468

Post by _jal »

patrick451 wrote: post #157
_jal wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, and it is a fact that cartel and authoritarian statist money laundering is intertwined with banking. See just about any story about Deutsche in the last decade. I've worked with sex-related sites before. And you're right that there are sleazy people in that industry. But it really isn't hard to distinguish, especially when you can see their payment stream. Without moralist obsessions with sex, nobody would care…

What's your point? Sans morals, nobody would care murder either.

What I find interesting is that everyone critiquing my critique completely ignores the swipe I took at banks. It appears to be utterly banal and beneath concern that banks subvert legal and moral efforts against multinational drug cartels and abusive authoritarian regimes.

I guess even with morals, people don't care about murder.

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

#469

Post by hackeraccount »

dymk wrote: post #82
hackeraccount wrote: post #56

There's a libertarian ethos that says anything between two consenting adults is the their business. I'm more and more skeptical not just of that principle but the self awareness of the people who purport to support it. I know that the choices I think are correct may not be - either for myself, for everyone or for any particular person. For that reason I don't think that anyone should run my life or that I should be t…

Your first and third paragraph are what lawmakers in e.g. Texas use to ban things like anal sex. Your second paragraph contradicts first and third. I have no idea what the fourth paragraph is trying to say.

If I sound contradictory it's because I'm uncertain.

Let's say I, like the people running Iran, think a woman should have her head covered in public. It's good for woman, men and all of us together.

What are my options? I can decide that whatever the individuals want the overall badness of an uncovered female head is so great that preventing that is worth sending people to jail. Alternately I could decide that the goodness of letting people make decisions about their own lives is worth the damage that an uncovered female head will do to men, woman and society.

It seems like the rule almost everyone uses is "consenting adults can do things that don't harm non-consenting adults" for everything they don't have a problem with. When they have a problem with it they just flip the script by claiming it's not really consenting. It end up being the open sesame of public policy.

The other problem I have is that I don't think the view I described is right. There has to be a place we - society, the law, whatever - can sit where we can go, "This is wrong. Even if you agree with the action it's hurting you or other people but I'm not going to send you to jail. I'm not going to help you. I'm going to keep shouting from the rooftops that this this is stupid but I'll stop short of depriving you of liberty."

The problem with my idea is that people look at that and they say, why go to all that trouble for something you believe is that harmful when you have the power to take one more little step and stop that thing. All you have to do is put one person in jail. The rest will be scared.

Ever read "the ones who walk away from omelas". It's that.

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

#470

Post by micromacrofoot »

daniel-cussen wrote: post #454
micromacrofoot wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I talk why I never will in part III. Dude I'm a Roman Law hero, I just won my 34th street fight, I'm taking the stairs now because I see too many smiling faces on the elevator, I was scouted many times and eventually actually went to get photos taken--I was a straight model, and the tallest model at all the castings. Nobody ever talks about this black hole. No man has ever--apparently--come forward first of his own a…

I don't mind reading walls of text. Why kind of mitigation costs $25000? This is something maybe I'm unaware of. (Also are there a lot of street fights where you live? I'm not sure I could handle that myself)
Post reply on HN