Agreed on not wanting to start a struggle session so maybe we should take this to the DMs.
I’m putting it under spoilers so people don’t have to see it if they don’t want to. This became a way too long rant that isn’t even directed to you cuz I know you’re a comrade who doesn’t want bad things to happen to sex workers. Just consider it a criticism of the ideology, not an attack on you or any individual.
spoiler
I agree that people (mostly women) being forced into it by economic necessity is a failure of capitalism and is wrong.
But I don’t understand how you can be pro-sex work and anti the ability to perform it. Pimps, I get. They are a parasite like any other manager/boss. But “johns” i.e. people who pay (if I’m understanding it correctly) are necessary for their to be any sex work at all. You can’t have the work if there is no one to pay, right?
So, the argument is just “we are anti sex work but don’t think sex workers are spawns of Satan here to corrupt innocent husbands like the Christians do.”
And if that’s the philosophy, then the policies they push will all be ones that prevent sex workers from making an income, which means you are not really pro-sex workers either. Maybe pro-humans in general but not pro-letting them do what they want in order to make money. You essentially force them to turn to an alternative they prefer less because you consider their work to be not-work.
Contrast this with most pro-sex work policies which all aim to actually address the problems that sex workers bring up - from decriminalisation to safety (from shitty/dangerous clients and cops), to testing, proper work benefits (like other jobs) etc etc.
Some anti-sex work types say they support these policies but let’s be honest here. If you’re actually anti-sex work then you can’t support policies that entrench, strength, and improve the industry. Your “support” is temporary or illusory. You want to, maybe not immediately, but definitely as soon as possible, prevent anyone from being able to do sex work.
And that will literally not happen under capitalism. Sex work may stop under socialism/communism but definitely not under the current system, where the only way to actually stop it, would be increased enforcement via police which will worsen the lives of sex workers in countless ways. Under capitalism, especially neoliberal capitalism, you are not gonna get any other policy for anti-sex work measures. It’s like thinking banning abortion will stop all abortions. No, it’ll just drive it even more underground and make it more dangerous.
The only “acceptable” form of anti-sex work advocates are those that say “yeah, we’ll help pro-sex work people get the policies they want to help sex workers, but we know that under communism there will be no sex work because everyone’s needs will be met and there will be no money.”
I think there's an important question about what being "anti" something means. If you're an abolitionist, it means something like: eliminate the conditions that create prostitutes, seek to remedy harm between Johns and the women they solicit, and run education campaigns against soliciting sex.
For a carceral socialist (like a lot of MLs, especially pre BLM), being anti a thing means banning it and enforcing that ban through fines, sweeps, and arrests.
These are very different propositions and it's important to figure out where people are at when they say they're "anti sex work"
And if that’s the philosophy, then the policies they push will all be ones that prevent sex workers from making an income, which means you are not really pro-sex workers either. Maybe pro-humans in general but not pro-letting them do what they want in order to make money. You essentially force them to turn to an alternative they prefer less because you consider their work to be not-work.
What part of this argument cannot be applied to other forms of extremely exploitative work, like, say, child labor? I'm anti child labor but that doesn't mean I hate children and want them to starve. I reject the idea that they should have to make money to support themselves in the first place. I want a dismantling of the entire concept of child labor. Same thing with (some kinds of) sex work. Like, someone doing onlyfans or something similar is basically fine, that's pretty much a different topic entirely. But human trafficking victims working in, say, one of those "massage parlors" are sex workers, and I want their work to no longer exist as soon as possible. Does that make me anti sex-worker? Because if so then yeah I am, proudly. No one on this planet should be doing that work, the entire category of labor in which that exists should be eradicated. I don't see how that can be controversial in a leftist space.
Edit: Like I take serious issue with the framing that people who are against these kinds of work are against it because it's "not work." The problem isn't that it's not work, the problem is what the work actually entails.
This issue of language that you are encountering is a problem with pro-john rhetoric (like that of our comrade's here) that drives me crazy. They treat "prostitute" like a slur and correct it to "sex worker" when "sex worker" is orders of magnitude broader, encompassing work that goes across the entire legal spectrum and varying wildly in things like safety. "Prostitute" is not a slur, and in fact is quite a necessary word unless you want to resort to absurdities like "lady of the night" to refer to it.
Anyway, your argument is fair but I think it would be easier to use migrant labor as an example so that you don't get bad-faith objections about "infantilizing women" by comparing it to child labor.
Anyway, your argument is fair but I think it would be easier to use migrant labor as an example so that you don't get bad-faith objections about "infantilizing women" by comparing it to child labor.
Good point, that is a much better example. As a guy (who believe it or not doesn't even watch porn) I try my best to stay out of this sort of discussion as much as possible, because it almost couldn't be further from something that affects me. So I haven't thoroughly thought through my arguments.
Agreed on not wanting to start a struggle session so maybe we should take this to the DMs.
I’m putting it under spoilers so people don’t have to see it if they don’t want to. This became a way too long rant that isn’t even directed to you cuz I know you’re a comrade who doesn’t want bad things to happen to sex workers. Just consider it a criticism of the ideology, not an attack on you or any individual.
spoiler
I agree that people (mostly women) being forced into it by economic necessity is a failure of capitalism and is wrong.
But I don’t understand how you can be pro-sex work and anti the ability to perform it. Pimps, I get. They are a parasite like any other manager/boss. But “johns” i.e. people who pay (if I’m understanding it correctly) are necessary for their to be any sex work at all. You can’t have the work if there is no one to pay, right?
So, the argument is just “we are anti sex work but don’t think sex workers are spawns of Satan here to corrupt innocent husbands like the Christians do.”
And if that’s the philosophy, then the policies they push will all be ones that prevent sex workers from making an income, which means you are not really pro-sex workers either. Maybe pro-humans in general but not pro-letting them do what they want in order to make money. You essentially force them to turn to an alternative they prefer less because you consider their work to be not-work.
Contrast this with most pro-sex work policies which all aim to actually address the problems that sex workers bring up - from decriminalisation to safety (from shitty/dangerous clients and cops), to testing, proper work benefits (like other jobs) etc etc.
Some anti-sex work types say they support these policies but let’s be honest here. If you’re actually anti-sex work then you can’t support policies that entrench, strength, and improve the industry. Your “support” is temporary or illusory. You want to, maybe not immediately, but definitely as soon as possible, prevent anyone from being able to do sex work.
And that will literally not happen under capitalism. Sex work may stop under socialism/communism but definitely not under the current system, where the only way to actually stop it, would be increased enforcement via police which will worsen the lives of sex workers in countless ways. Under capitalism, especially neoliberal capitalism, you are not gonna get any other policy for anti-sex work measures. It’s like thinking banning abortion will stop all abortions. No, it’ll just drive it even more underground and make it more dangerous.
The only “acceptable” form of anti-sex work advocates are those that say “yeah, we’ll help pro-sex work people get the policies they want to help sex workers, but we know that under communism there will be no sex work because everyone’s needs will be met and there will be no money.”
Which. Yeah. Agreed.
more sex work discourse
I think there's an important question about what being "anti" something means. If you're an abolitionist, it means something like: eliminate the conditions that create prostitutes, seek to remedy harm between Johns and the women they solicit, and run education campaigns against soliciting sex.
For a carceral socialist (like a lot of MLs, especially pre BLM), being anti a thing means banning it and enforcing that ban through fines, sweeps, and arrests.
These are very different propositions and it's important to figure out where people are at when they say they're "anti sex work"
That’s a great distinction. I agree.
spoiler
What part of this argument cannot be applied to other forms of extremely exploitative work, like, say, child labor? I'm anti child labor but that doesn't mean I hate children and want them to starve. I reject the idea that they should have to make money to support themselves in the first place. I want a dismantling of the entire concept of child labor. Same thing with (some kinds of) sex work. Like, someone doing onlyfans or something similar is basically fine, that's pretty much a different topic entirely. But human trafficking victims working in, say, one of those "massage parlors" are sex workers, and I want their work to no longer exist as soon as possible. Does that make me anti sex-worker? Because if so then yeah I am, proudly. No one on this planet should be doing that work, the entire category of labor in which that exists should be eradicated. I don't see how that can be controversial in a leftist space.
Edit: Like I take serious issue with the framing that people who are against these kinds of work are against it because it's "not work." The problem isn't that it's not work, the problem is what the work actually entails.
spoiler
This issue of language that you are encountering is a problem with pro-john rhetoric (like that of our comrade's here) that drives me crazy. They treat "prostitute" like a slur and correct it to "sex worker" when "sex worker" is orders of magnitude broader, encompassing work that goes across the entire legal spectrum and varying wildly in things like safety. "Prostitute" is not a slur, and in fact is quite a necessary word unless you want to resort to absurdities like "lady of the night" to refer to it.
Anyway, your argument is fair but I think it would be easier to use migrant labor as an example so that you don't get bad-faith objections about "infantilizing women" by comparing it to child labor.
spoiler
Good point, that is a much better example. As a guy (who believe it or not doesn't even watch porn) I try my best to stay out of this sort of discussion as much as possible, because it almost couldn't be further from something that affects me. So I haven't thoroughly thought through my arguments.