The fact that you can totally:
- rent your body for modeling
- rent your body for physical labor
- rent your brain for "skilled" labor
But it's illegal or "immoral" to:
- rent your body for modeling
- rent your body for physical labor
- rent your brain for "skilled" labor
if you add the words "while naked" to it
...is fucking ridiculous.
#SexWorkIsWork #FuckPuritanicalBullshit #FuckThePatriarchy #StopSexShaming
reshared this
Indio Gringo ยฎ
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •acb
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •Harmony reshared this.
Magnus Ahltorp
in reply to acb • • •LukefromDC
in reply to Magnus Ahltorp • • •@ahltorp @acb This would end if those selling sex never had to disguise themselves as selling massages.
These are really two separate businesses.
When someone is getting their legs massaged after a 140 mile bicycle race stage, they need someone who is skilled at pushing the lactate out of their leg muscles and back to the bloodstream. What their masseur looks like is the last thing they are going to be worried about, and they might not have energy to spare for sex anyway until the race has been over a few days. These masseurs are specialized professionals.
By the same token, someone looking for sex who cannot easily find partners (an aro autistic straight guy perhaps?) is wasting time and money if they have to sort out who is in the massage business and who is in the sex business by trying a bunch of places. The sex workers they are trying to find are also specialized professionals, but in a different field then the one mentioned above.
Getting rid of laws about sex work benefits both groups of clients and as well as the workers in both sets of shops. Only bribe-taking cops and prosecutors plus bigots lose.
I speak as a former sex worker myself: in my late teens and 20's I used to work as a stripper as well as a "hustler." This was the name for the subculture of younger Gay men who sold sex. Some for survival, some to meet expenses. In my case, to pay for getting into the places I met the rest of my partners and to partially subsidize drag racing a car I had build up. The latter I got out of over climate chaos, but a few long-term johns stuck around much longer.
Everything I did was completely in the open and above-board. Our culture was very strongly defended in those days.
In 1984, work of a Reagan administration backed raid on much of DC's Gay sex industry leaked. The clubs warned up, and we set up to resist the raids. Knowing we were waiting for them, they never showed up. The leak made the Washington Blade as "Rumors of Raids."
Chaucerburnt
in reply to Magnus Ahltorp • • •@ahltorp @acb I live in a state where sex work has been decriminalised. Massage parlors that don't offer sexual services can put up signs warning that any requests for sex will get customers kicked out without a refund.
And since the ones that do offer sexual services don't have to conceal it, it's much easier for people looking for those services to find those places without having to guess.
Birdhouse in Your [Redacted]
in reply to Magnus Ahltorp • • •@ahltorp @acb in my experience legal full service sex work vastly reduces the issue you lay out above.
When full service is fully legal and above board, people who want that simply go to where that's openly offered.
If they request an illegal on-the-side service in a non-brothel venue in a place where legal brothels exist (they still do, just less often), then they have no excuse. There's no plausible deniability in "well I thought this was a secret illegal brothel since brothels are illegal so I thought I was allowed to ask about sex". It's a very clear cut case of sexual harassment.
Magnus Ahltorp
in reply to Birdhouse in Your [Redacted] • • •Shine
in reply to Magnus Ahltorp • • •Even if this was true, and I highly doubt it, I'd take occasional "client is stupid and requests sex work during a normal massage" over "sex workers are often getting trafficked, abused and sometimes murdered", which happens way more when it's illegal.
Also, as someone else said, what you described will happen way more often when sex work is illegal, because no one will know which massage places offer illegal services. And it will be more dangerous for workers in those that do, because if they report an abusive client, they will admit to crime.
Harmony reshared this.
bonechicken
in reply to Magnus Ahltorp • • •@ahltorp it seems like you have a problem with your men, not your laws.
fix your men.
@coolandnormal @acb @alice @LukefromDC
Birdhouse in Your [Redacted]
in reply to bonechicken • • •@thegarbagebird @acb @LukefromDC the really fascinating thing to me is what brought @ahltorp here. He has clearly never been a massage therapist. If he's been a sex worker it wasn't for long. So what's the connection keeping the motivation to fight industry people who know what they're talking about?
My money is he's a client at massage parlours who keeps getting turned down for sex and lectured about it but is too whorephobic to just go get the service he wants.
Magnus Ahltorp
in reply to Birdhouse in Your [Redacted] • • •@coolandnormal Itโs very simple. I have two friends who are massage therapists. Iโve never been one, correct. Iโve never been a sex worker, correct. Thatโs as far as you are correct, however.
I went to see my friend to have a chat, and this prospective client does this solicitation in front of me.
I was disgusted, and worried for my friend. And your only response is โtheir โno sexโ sign wasnโt big enoughโ victim blaming. This makes me think you care more about sex clients than workers.
hot tran*sexual menace
in reply to Magnus Ahltorp • • •@ahltorp @coolandnormal you are hxperfocusing on this singular thing.
You want to make the lives of all sex workers more dangerous and/or take away their often chosen means of earning a living, in order so that your two friends don't experience sexual harassment from men.
Are you in a rage post session, is this in good faith? You notice how you sound?
hot tran*sexual menace
in reply to hot tran*sexual menace • • •@ahltorp @coolandnormal btw men would find other ways to sexually harass your friends.
The sign no sex work doesn't work, because sexual harassment isn't about soliciting. It might actually be counterproductive because it gives the men pointers what will be particularly annoying.
Magnus Ahltorp
in reply to hot tran*sexual menace • • •@missqarnstein The person Iโm talking about didnโt seem to know they were harassing, and certainly didnโt seem like they were doing it on purpose. They acted within the rules of the society that they live in, where exploiting women is so normalised it didnโt feel like a great thing to ask.
Thatโs exactly my problem with this. Horny politicians wanting their exploitation of women to be legal.
โmeans of earning a livingโ implies that itโs not voluntary and thus forced.
hot tran*sexual menace
in reply to Magnus Ahltorp • • •@ahltorp we all are forced to work if we don't have a couple million in stock value, we can choose what we do not if.
I have first experience with sexual harassment, it is never about sex. It is about power and using any tool to make a feminine person feel small and powerless. Prescribing innocence to men that ignore signs or are even directly motivated by signs not to do something is directly contrary to your supposed intentions.
hot tran*sexual menace
in reply to hot tran*sexual menace • • •Scar
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •Harmony reshared this.
bartholin (spoopi arc)
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •Jonathan Lamothe
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • •@๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) I mean, I usually did my last job in my underwear, but it was WFH and no one could see me.
I also left that job on a mental health leave that I just never returned from, so good riddance.
I suppose that's a bit of a departure from your original point though.
like this
๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ), Morgan โง๏ธ and Rupert V/ like this.
youknowthatonepersonwithaface
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •kabel42
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •The Orange Theme
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •Sensitive content
Chaucerburnt
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •Harmony reshared this.
Simon Brooke
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •I have said many times, and will continue to say, that Scotland will not be a civilised country until any person can walk naked from one side of Glasgow to the other without receiving any unwanted attention.
What people wear (or don't) should be their business, and no-one else's.
Natsura
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •Jonathan Lamothe
Unknown parent • •like this
๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) and Grace Vulpes Alopex (973748) like this.
Ethan Mizara
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •I'm illegal to the touch๐ฆ๐
Gildilinie Gremlin ๐ณ๏ธโโง๏ธ๐ณ
Unknown parent • • •Jonathan Lamothe
Unknown parent • •like this
๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ), Grace Vulpes Alopex (973748) and Lesley M ๐ด๓ ง๓ ข๓ ณ๓ ฃ๓ ด๓ ฟ ๐ช๐บ like this.
shironeko
Unknown parent • • •Starraven
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •oscarfalcon
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •normy foxyoreos
Unknown parent • • •@bartholin people outside of sex industries often have no idea just how bad this stuff is. They just assume that you can go on any platform and make this work.
The number of times I've talked about this and people have said, "wait, Paypal wouldn't ban you for being a naked model or selling porn."
Just a complete lack of awareness about what platforms are doing.
The Cyberwitch
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •normy foxyoreos
Unknown parent • • •@wildlyfist Fuck off, you are normalizing discrimination against us. You know nothing about our communities, about our clients, or about the oppression that sex workers face, yet you wax poetic about how we're part of the problem.
The "problem" is our discrimination. Period.
Want to abolish work? Fine, you can start sending us money now. If not, then you can get out of our way, allow us to earn our own livings, and stop treating our rights like a philosophical exercise.
Harmony reshared this.
Infrapink (he/his/him)
Unknown parent • • •@Natsura
No, it's part of the early legends, and the reason we leave out stockings. That story where he dropped pouches of gold down the chimney so the poor women could afford dowries to marry decent men? The stories we tell children leave out the part where, if they weren't able to find good husbands, they would have had to become prostitutes to make ends meet. That's why they really needed the money.
(I understood your joke, I just wanted to share some knowledge).
Magnus Ahltorp
Unknown parent • • •FredricT ๐ท๐๐ป๐
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •BewilderedKat
Unknown parent • • •@aamurusko79
This is actually a significant division, and is also not exactly new. In my experience it tends to be more popular with radfems, but not exclusively. The rigid viewpoint of "Porn is exploitative or degrading to women" has a kernel of truth to it. Most of the arguments have some degree of truth. There are real problems with exploitative porn and using porn to normalize abusive sexual practices. But to take it and use it as a blanket argument against all porn as if it's a homogeneous system is where it escapes the atmosphere. It is only further used to stifle women and censor their voices instead of actually working on fixing the underlying issues.
When third-wave feminism picked up momentum, sex-positive feminism started catching on. Ellen Willis, Jamaica Kincaid, etc. are significant figures here.
Quote from Ellen Willis
> "As we saw it, the claim that 'pornography is violence against women' was code for the neo-Victorian idea that men want sex and women endure it."
Much of feminist porn started up to help dispel common myths like "women don't enjoy sex", "women need a relational context to enjoy sex", "women only enjoy vanilla sex", etc.
From what I've observed has had a much more meaningful impact in reducing problems with the porn industry. Women earn more than men on average, for example.
Tristan Taormino, Nina Hartley, Erika Lust, Shine Louise Houston, Vex Ashley, etc. are examples of big names in the feminist porn space if anyone needs things to look up. There's a good podcast called "Girls On Porn" that covers and contrasts ethical feminist porn and reviews certain pieces.
The demand for sexual content isn't going to disappear because it gets censored. Do we want the public at large to be consuming exploitative porn driven by the toxic male gaze or do we want more ethical representation of sexuality and foster an industry that prioritizes safety and well-being of the performers involved?
@alice
CIMB4
Unknown parent • • •Sensitive content
V
in reply to BewilderedKat • • •Sensitive content
There's also a degree to which the argument about exploitation can be applied to most industries?
Like, mining causes all sorts of problems to the people working in the mines, but "close all the mines, and ban them" is never taken seriously as an option - what is a serious option is worker & labour protections, health protections, risk-managment; things to help those being exploited, not outlaw the entire industry.
๐ฟ๐ถ๐๐ถ "not yet begun to fight"
Unknown parent • • •Sensitive content
Fine, don't believe me. I'm trying to warn you that this line of argument does not work because the distinction you believe you're drawing does not exist in their mind. To the landlord - you need to hear me on this - THEY DO PHYSICAL LABOR. To the techbro - you need to hear me on this - THEY DO INTELLECTUAL LABOR. They will take your argument and twist it against itself, trust me. It's a losing argument. Scotsman fallacies always are.
V
Unknown parent • • •Sensitive content
Zimmie
Unknown parent • • •Sensitive content
@miss_rodent @Lana @h3mmy @aamurusko79 Put another way, anything that can be classified as โpassive incomeโ clearly isnโt labor. Itโs passive. Theyโre getting paid for owning something rather than for doing something.
Owning something isnโt a job.
Performing an actionโany actionโcan be a job if someone is willing to trade something for it. Performing an action on something you own (e.g, a landlord maintaining a property they rent out) can be a job, but the owning part is orthogonal to the job part.
V
Unknown parent • • •Sensitive content
People do all sorts of labour I don't *like*, I don't *like* cops but most of what they do clearly falls into the category of labour.
It's a distinction I am drawing on the nature of the economic interaction.
๐ฟ๐ถ๐๐ถ "not yet begun to fight"
Unknown parent • • •Sensitive content
@miss_rodent @h3mmy @aamurusko79
I am not the one you need to convince. And the people who you need to convince (landlords and techbros) 100% believe with their entire chest that what they do is labor. That is why "actual labor" runs afoul of the No True Scotsman fallacy. It's literally right in the phrase.
"This thing that I like over here counts as labor, but these other things over there that I don't like don't count as 'actual' labor." Textbook Scotsman fallacy.
V
Unknown parent • • •Sensitive content
๐ฟ๐ถ๐๐ถ "not yet begun to fight"
Unknown parent • • •Sensitive content
@miss_rodent @h3mmy @aamurusko79
I think your use of the term "actual labor" runs afoul of the "no true Scotsman" fallacy.
They would be just as quick to assert that sex work is not "actual labor". This is a losing argument, unfortunately.
V
Unknown parent • • •Sensitive content
๐ฟ๐ถ๐๐ถ "not yet begun to fight"
in reply to V • • •Sensitive content
Be careful with that rebuttal though, because there are certainly other industries to which the logic certainly could and should be applied. The landlord/housing industry, and the techbro/A.I. industry are two which come to mind.
normy foxyoreos
in reply to normy foxyoreos • • •@wildlyfist there is more diversity, equality, and genuine sexual expression and mutual care in my industry than your commentators have ever imagined. They know nothing.
My rights are not an intellectual exercise, they're not an opportunity for you to wax poetic about what you do and don't want normalized. You're not a philosopher, and this isn't a polite conversation. It is discrimination.
Chaucerburnt
in reply to normy foxyoreos • • •@foxyoreos @wildlyfist yeah, it's a special kind of obnoxiousness that sees a situation that is *right now* cutting OP off from financial services, and suggests that they should "just" solve the problem by implementing massive social change that would take decades *at best*.
People gotta eat on the way to utopia, not just when we get there.
punIssuer
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •George Carlin comes to mindโฆ
"Selling is legal; fucking is legal.
Why isn't selling fucking legal?"
youtube.com/watch?v=Xcg32kBGqDโฆ
- YouTube
www.youtube.comUriel Fanelli
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •Harmony
in reply to Uriel Fanelli • • •mray
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •just notice what it does adding it to the conclusion of that very post! ๐คฏ
๐
Negative12DollarBill
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •BewilderedKat
Unknown parent • • •Let's not forget that they don't even know what they like much of the time! And it was hit or miss on whether it was easy to get more information or not.
@kabel42 @alice
johnduggins
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •masukomi
in reply to ๐ ฐ๐ ป๐ ธ๐ ฒ๐ ด (๐๐ฆ) • • •masukomi
Unknown parent • • •masukomi
Unknown parent • • •