It’s ridiculous that we blatantly ignore the solution staring us directly in the face.
Decriminalizing, destigmatizing and demystifying sex and sex work would solve so many damn issues.
The obstacle to this clear and easy solution? Outdated Religion, biases, beliefs, and traditions That are in no way based on fact, and do not actually reflect what all people are choosing to believe in traditionally, emotionally or spiritually
Do we need the capability to have orgies and fuck our mates in Public? No. Should we be able to talk about sex and intimacy and other things in public to a willing audience? Hell. Fucking. Yes.
Always felt bizarre that people who brand themselves feminists can be anti-sex work, or even anti-porn.
It completely goes against the notion of body autonomy, encourages policies that are harmful to women, and seems much more likely to align with conservative politics.
I am always surprised at the fairly progressive people I see online that are anti- porn and anti-sex work. Especially from young men and woman. It's simple body autonomy issues and people are only against it from years of religious based shame. Controlling something so fundamental of course is powerful since that frustration and shame can be directed elsewhere.
Look at the attacks against queer and sex positive from the right they seem like jealousy. Always talking about urges and getting into graphic details like they wish they could do that. They want to have what others have unlocked and attack them for it. The same with capitalists who attack masterbation and sex. It's free to do and joyful which of course means they can't profit from it.
I know this is my “old man yells at clouds” take, but young people especially are so socially and economically progressive while being so remarkably puritanical. Like, you could have a movie about sex workers and the same people that praise it for representation would unironically complain if it (god forbid) had any nudity.
people are only against it from years of religious based shame
I don’t think that’s really it in a contemporary perspective. During the 20th century, sure, but young people don’t really go to church or unironically consume Christian ideological rhetoric en masse. I think a lot of it has to do with how mass media is structured, built, and presented today. Everything has been boiled down to the most formulaic and family friendly fare imaginable, so people just don’t see sex, nudity, or physical intimacy presented in the media they consume. That’s not something “fit for all audiences,” which means it reduces the number of people they can sell it to. You see the same thing with places like reddit that have been slowly cracking down on and removing NSFW subreddits for years. I mean, it’s great if you’re asexual. But for everyone else? It sorta ghettoizes the idea of physical intimacy.
The religious rhetoric and shame is so baked in the system people don't even have to go to church anymore. The religious right and their abstinence only education has been forced into everything. Most states don't even require medically accurate sex education and most don't even talk about it. This leads to the situation you described. This is usually caked in the "protect the kids" rhetoric.
I'm always surprised that every year around pride this same sex negative talk against nudity and sexual comes up. It's like people are for queerness as long as it's not sexual
I am pro sex work and live in a country where it is legal for all adults involved (except pimps) but I don’t agree with this:
It’s simple body autonomy issues and people are only against it from years of religious based shame.
From what I have seen, the people who are against it who actually organise against it tend to be motivated by a desire to protect people from coercion and trafficking.
I don’t agree with them that criminalising it would achieve that, but it’s definitely their position.
Emulating leftist rhetoric to push right-wing ideas is a common tactic.
I’ve seen people try to push “abortion bad because men force women to get them” and similar bad-faith arguments for years, by anti-choicers who think they’re a lot t more clever than they are.
It’s very easy to see how “sex work primarily caters to straight males at the expense of women’s health and safety, so sex work bad” would resonate with people.
I see the logic but pretty easy to see through it as a bad faith argument. Especially since most people who say that balk at making it legal to protect sex work
For a feminist to demonise sex workers, or just fail to support them, is as counter-intuitive & bizarre to me as the idea of a labour activist who rejects & demonises workers generally.
I don’t know whether or not feminist demonization of sex workers is widespread. I have heard of feminists who demonize sex work, because it can be exploitative and not everyone who engages in sex work is necessarily doing so completely of their own volition, in ways both similar and not so similar to regular work.
If people really want to stop the exploitative nature of the work it should be out in the open and protected like any other job. It's the shame and hiding that allows this exploitative behavior
Was expressing thoughts on the matters raised in the article, which is primarily about the demonisation of sex workers by feminists.
Certainly demonising sex work seems compatible with demonising work generally, so long as one is cognisant that as a relatively small sector it can be very easily driven underground, which makes it considerably more hazardous for the workers.
Some other work environments are also largely concealed from public view, so though they’re hidden for (somewhat) different reasons, workers in those sectors are also very vulnerable to abuse. Factory farms are one example, but there are many more.
Really I think it boils down to allowing the workers to be the ones whose voices are the most prominent with regard to their work, rather than other activists dictating over them.
Rereading the article, I honestly don’t really consider SWERFs or TERFs to be feminists, and not even just in a rhetorical way. I didn’t even mentally place them in the category of “people who could potentially be seen by others as feminists” when I read the article, which is why I was somewhat confused about the response. My bad.
Add comment