"Sex-Work"

[Greed and Death]

THIS. Also taxation.

When you're mandating STI testing, you're no longer regulating the commercial aspect of sex work.

To enter commerce you must have a recent STI check, just like you need a recent vision test to drive.

[Stellar Colonies]

I don't like sex work and everything about it feels wrong to me, but regulating it to improve conditions for those selling and buying would probably be better than shoving it into a corner.

Although I'd prefer if it were somehow done away with entirely, which is not going to happen. Better to make it less of a problem than leaving the industry to fester in the corners of society, with abuses against the men and women involved with it.

[Punished UMN]

When you're mandating STI testing, you're no longer regulating the commercial aspect of sex work.

To enter commerce you must have a recent STI check, just like you need a recent vision test to drive.

Driving isn't an integral aspect of your right as a human, being able to freely have sex with consenting partners is.

[Purpelia]

THIS. Also taxation.

When you're mandating STI testing, you're no longer regulating the commercial aspect of sex work.

True. But let's not fool our self into thinking that the government is doing this for reasons of pure altruism and care for its people.

[Punished UMN]

When you're mandating STI testing, you're no longer regulating the commercial aspect of sex work.

True. But let's not fool our self into thinking that the government is doing this for reasons of pure altruism and care for its people.

My point is that if the government is regulating sex work in such a way, it has the power (and indeed, it is an admission of a compelling governmental interest) to regulate sexual behavior between consenting adults, and that this is a can of worms that we perhaps should not open.

[Suriyanakhon]

I don't think that sex work can ever be fully consensual because there is a clear power imbalance between the buyer with the money and the person that they're purchasing sex from. We should decriminalize and destigmatize people who have had to sell their bodies to survive and pass legislation to solve the socioeconomic causes of prostitution, but it should never be seen as a legitimate or morally acceptable business.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

What if instead of having sex work, we had a society where sexual morals weren't so strict as to force people to go underground and pay for sex with someone who doesn't wanna have sex but has to to survive. Oh and said society also degrades and demeans said sex workers.

Hippie-style free love. Who's with me ?

[Aclion]

Driving isn't an integral aspect of your right as a human, being able to freely have sex with consenting partners is.

[/quote]
The issue here isn't having sex. Its selling it. Once your engaged in commerce there's an expectation that a product or service meets reasonable expectations, and one of those expectations is that it won't get you sick. This is why you need licensing and heath inspections to operate a restaurant, but anyone can cook food at home and give to friends or family. The former is commerce, and can be regulated as such.
When you have sex as commerce your partners are customers, and as customers they have an implied warranty of merchantability.

[Punished UMN]

Driving isn't an integral aspect of your right as a human, being able to freely have sex with consenting partners is.

The issue here isn't having sex. Its selling it. Once your engaged in commerce there's an expectation that a product or service meets reasonable expectations, and one of those expectations is that it won't get you sick. This is why you need licensing and heath inspections to operate a restaurant, but anyone can cook food at home and give to friends or family. The former is commerce, and can be regulated as such.
When you have sex as commerce your partners are customers, and as customers they have an implied warranty of merchantability.[/quote]
The partners are not customers, they are employers.

[Punished UMN]

What if instead of having sex work, we had a society where sexual morals weren't so strict as to force people to go underground and pay for sex with someone who doesn't wanna have sex but has to to survive. Oh and said society also degrades and demeans said sex workers.

Hippie-style free love. Who's with me ?

Free love wouldn't solve that problem, as we already have a society where sexual morals are not strict.

[Katganistan]

The main issue with the criminalisation of sex work is that sex workers are often marginalised as a result, left unable to report violent or abusive customers.

Criminalisation does not prevent sex work; it merely drives it underground and makes it dangerous for the people involved.

Purely for the safety of the men and women who work in the sex industry, I would legalise and decriminalise consensual sex work, making sex work subject to taxing and licensing; the state should also offer free health checks to all sex workers, and provide an easy, streamlined way where abusive clients can be reported and prosecuted and where other sex workers can be warned about them in advance.

However, non-consensual sex work should be stamped out vigorously, and those responsible for trafficking women subject to harsh sentences. Ironically, this is largely only possible when women themselves do not fear they will be the ones arrested for the work they are forced to do.

What I have to worry about with legalization is the possibility that the state will try to regulate sex work out of existence, which would have the same effect in the end as it being illegal. I think decriminalization with access to resources would be safer.

That has not happened in Nevada yet, has it?

[Borderlands of Rojava]

What if instead of having sex work, we had a society where sexual morals weren't so strict as to force people to go underground and pay for sex with someone who doesn't wanna have sex but has to to survive. Oh and said society also degrades and demeans said sex workers.

Hippie-style free love. Who's with me ?

Free love wouldn't solve that problem, as we already have a society where sexual morals are not strict.

They still kinda are though. True, not like the 1950s but women often get degraded for being "easy" even now, and men get degraded for sharing a woman with other men.

[Punished UMN]

Free love wouldn't solve that problem, as we already have a society where sexual morals are not strict.

They still kinda are though. True, not like the 1950s but women often get degraded for being "easy" even now, and men get degraded for sharing a woman with other men.

The reasons for that are evolutionary, not social.

[Katganistan]

Well, prostitution is a threat to monogamy. An unfaithful partner can have sex with a prostitute without risk of an emotional attachment, making it more discreet than an affair, and also allowing them to tell themselves "it's just this one time, while hubby has that temporary erection problem". There may also be a sense that it's less unfaithful, since it's just for money, though the partner might see it the opposite way.

No, prostitution does not threaten monogamy. A person's unwillingess to remain in an exclusive relationship with their partner is the only threat to monogamy.

In other words, it is the choice of a partner to stop practicing monogamy that threatens monogamy.

[Catsfern]

If two (or more) consenting adults want to do what two (or more) consenting adults do It's really none of my business what they do or how they do it. And if you want to take advantage of some consenting adults wanting to do it more often than others and charge them for that service than you should have every right to.

[Katganistan]

A couple problems with legalization, from my perspective, being employed (i.e. dependent upon others for survival) is coercive, and so sex work is also coercive (this is true under capitalism as a rule), and secondly, when we talk about regulating sex work, we are talking about regulating the sex that people are having. Why is it that in other cases, people are inclined to say that the government doesn't belong in people's bedrooms, but when money is exchanged, suddenly the government can go nuts?

License people to have sex and particularly to have children, then.
Solve a lot of problems.

But seriously, the answer is this: no one gives a shit if you're tearing up your own private road/track on a motorcycle, but the moment you put yourself someplace public you'd best be licensed to do it.

If you're having sex in the privacy of your home, or your partner's, or a mutually agreed upon private place, it's no one's business unless the health department needs to get involved. Or your spouse finds out that you've a secret OPEN relationship while they were adhering to your previously agreed upon monogamous relationship, and courts get involved.

The volume of sexual partners a sex worker will have will make health inspections necessary, hence the need for licensing. The need to provide a safe and healthy workplace, properly taxed pay, health benefits, and managers/protectors, will also make licensing necessary. Payroll tax also will make regulation and licensing necessary; you need to make sure they are not violating OSHA rules.

You ever just stop and think about how sometimes a hypersexual society can be as oppressive and awful as a society that makes sex taboo and bans premarital sex by law?

Damn, there are women out there literally having sex just to be able to eat, and this shit is okay?

There are PEOPLE having sex for pay, regardless of their gender identity. Let's not be sexist about it.

Because it's generally accepted that one of the basic purviews of government is to moderate contracts and prevent abuse, sadly abuse is far too common in the sex industry atm.

How does the government regulate contracts between private individuals with regard to something as intimate as sex? What counts as a contract? If a kid sets up a lemonade stand, should the government regulate that too?

Clearly you've never read news stories about kids' lemonade stands (and cookies, et cetera) being shut down for not having a permit.

I wish I were joking about that.

[Aclion]

The partners are not customers, they are employers.

This is incorrect, unless there's an arrangement where the client is paying a regular wage for regular work, garunteeing a minimum amount of work, providing tax preparation and employee benefits, and is entitled to prevent them seeing other partners the they are not employees. In fact right now because it's illegal to solicited a prostitute it's impossible to have such an arrangement, due to the need for the employer to report wages and hours worked to the irs.
Prostitutes are at best freelancers, so their clients are also customers.

But all this is academic, because you know who else has an implied warranty of merchantability? Employers.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

You ever just stop and think about how sometimes a hypersexual society can be as oppressive and awful as a society that makes sex taboo and bans premarital sex by law?

Damn, there are women out there literally having sex just to be able to eat, and this shit is okay?

There are PEOPLE having sex for pay, regardless of their gender identity. Let's not be sexist about it.

You're right but it's heavily female. But yes there are men, women and kids doing that, and honestly it is pretty messed up.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

They still kinda are though. True, not like the 1950s but women often get degraded for being "easy" even now, and men get degraded for sharing a woman with other men.

The reasons for that are evolutionary, not social.

Monogamy is not evolutionary at all lmfao. Its a rejection of our evolutionary instincts.

[Punished UMN]

The reasons for that are evolutionary, not social.

Monogamy is not evolutionary at all lmfao. Its a rejection of our evolutionary instincts.

Monogamy and polygyny are evolutionary, because they allow males to have a greater degree of confidence in which children they have fathered than other arrangements do. Polygyny is disadvantageous to society however. Monogamy is probably the best system because it affords women an equal place in the relationship to men.

[Katganistan]

To enter commerce you must have a recent STI check, just like you need a recent vision test to drive.

Driving isn't an integral aspect of your right as a human, being able to freely have sex with consenting partners is.

Are you taking about private or public relationships, though?

I can cook a meal for myself. I can cook a meal for friends. But the minute I rent a storefront and start selling said meals, you bet the government will be involved to make sure that I am obeying proper sanitation procedures.

Why is this difficult for you to understand?

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

There are PEOPLE having sex for pay, regardless of their gender identity. Let's not be sexist about it.

You're right but it's heavily female. But yes there are men, women and kids doing that, and honestly it is pretty messed up.

I think men sex works similarly match the amount of women sex workers, actually.

[Punished UMN]

Driving isn't an integral aspect of your right as a human, being able to freely have sex with consenting partners is.

Are you taking about private or public relationships, though?

I can cook a meal for myself. I can cook a meal for friends. But the minute I rent a storefront and start selling said meals, you bet the government will be involved to make sure that I am obeying proper sanitation procedures.

Why is this difficult for you to understand?

Because it is not the act of exchanging money that is being regulated, it is the act of sexual intercourse that is. There is no more reasonable public interest for sex workers to be forced to be regularly tested for STI's than for any other person with a similar volume of sexual partners.

[Alternamerica]

Legalize it, have a union for it, etc etc

[Aclion]

Are you taking about private or public relationships, though?

I can cook a meal for myself. I can cook a meal for friends. But the minute I rent a storefront and start selling said meals, you bet the government will be involved to make sure that I am obeying proper sanitation procedures.

Why is this difficult for you to understand?

Because it is not the act of exchanging money that is being regulated, it is the act of sexual intercourse that is. There is no more reasonable public interest for sex workers to be forced to be regularly tested for STI's than for any other person with a similar volume of sexual partners.

There is the same public interest in testing sex workers for stds that there for checking that a restauranter is following heath regulations. Namely, public safety.
I've already explained to you why suitability matters when you're engaged in commerce so I don't know why you're still not getting this concept. It really is not complicated.

Legalize it, have a union for it, etc etc

https://www.theonion.com/attractive-gir ... 1819594753