Although I have not watched a lot of Hasan videos , I think he is not actually leftist ! He is liberal at best , posing to be leftist ?

  • Dolores [love/loves]
    ·
    10 months ago

    could you explain this position on SW to me?

    cw sv

    the two components seem at odds, because usually when people take the solicitors are r***ists line, the prescription is banning it. but almost every mode of support for sex workers i've heard of involves the further legalization & formalization of SW. how do you square this?

    • HumanBehaviorByBjork [any, undecided]
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      they're an actual swerf lol. to them it's a moral hazard first and foremost, concerns about economic exploitation and liberation are secondary. Ask them if they think porn addiction is real next.

      • Dolores [love/loves]
        ·
        10 months ago

        how can sex workers make a living in the open if their customers have to be underground? wouldn't this empower brokers to insure a successful transaction, just like under regular prohibition?

        • ZoomeristLeninist [comrade/them, she/her]M
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          how do sex workers have customers now? the only difference would be sex workers would have more power over their clientele. this also lessens the power of brokers bc their occupation would still be illegal, as they are a party to solicitation of sex. full legalization is what would give the brokers more power, as it makes their business legal, elevating them to the proper, legal bourgeoisie— paying wages to sex workers while legally extracting their surplus value

          • Dolores [love/loves]
            ·
            10 months ago

            i would argue the way sex workers get customers is at the core of your complaints about sexwork. you'll still need pimps if the johns need to vet/be vetted to avoid getting arrested, it's part of the reason they exist now. the other component, safety, is not affected so much by the legal immunity you propose, because everyone involved except the sexworker are committing illegal acts, and so the trade is still secret & incentives to not report/act on abuse remain for those parties---even for the SWs who might still risk their livelihood.

            if neither party is committing a crime, the reasons for a broker diminish, or their role more resembles an agent. if a crime is committed any party can call for help, not just the sexworker. for the record i'm advocating decriminalization, not legalization into designated brothels in designated districts

            • ZoomeristLeninist [comrade/them, she/her]M
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              good points. johns and pimps are still reprehensible, but i can see how decriminalization on both sides can be safer/better for sex workers

              • Dolores [love/loves]
                ·
                10 months ago

                drug dealers, even the legal ones are shittheads too, but when the trade is public they've less ability to poison people, which is the best we can do short of revolution. thats the other decriminalization case i think is helpful to think about and compare.