I do have real trouble buying into euphemisms like sex workers. Generally they wheel out the most articulate and level headed of these folks for these types of moments but it remains that this is a sordid business (created by the demand side) and most of the poor souls caught up in this are not there by choice. Yes, protect them and their rights wherever possible but "sex workers?" I guess is has a better ring to it then "abused, drug addicted and trafficked young girls and women."
The medical benefits argument pays for itself on the public health side alone. that is not my point. My point is that this a sordid business and eupenisms like "sex workers" and "the oldest business" hide the fact that women are often being abused or trafficked, health care or not. It also takes the heat off of the demand side of the business which is what I find most reprehensible. Call me a prude but I have real problems with the clientele of this business.
They are able to be abused and trafficked precisely because of prude attitudes like yours. In other countries sex work is treated just like other work. There it is no more sordid than working at a slaughterhouse or a factory farm. Less, IMO.
That is not true. There is nothing "prude" in trying to get these women a better life. They are trafficked because of the demand of men like you. They are trafficked because women DON'T WANT that life for them and the only way to make them do it is by extorsion, abuse and harassment.
Sordid is engaging with pimps and johns, who are the scum of the earth. It's not about sex, but about power. Pimps and johns love the idea of a powerless woman who has to do as they say. New Zealand, Germany and other countries were prostitution is regulated are hell for prostituted women. Only the poorest and most vulnerable are exploited there too. NO WOMAN wants to do that.
One who is excessively concerned with being or appearing to be proper, modest, or righteous.
You have decided that the workers in this video need a "better" life. You deciding what is a "better" life is the definition of prude. You're welcome.
I have personal, very close friendships with people who have worked in the sex trade in Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Austria and a couple of other countries. Their experience is exactly NOT what you are saying. The opposite is true. By having the work legalized and regulated they were (no longer in the trade) protected - and well paid.
You mistake/conflate our concern for the wellbeing of these women with a "modest" or "righteous" (aka religious) attitude. That is not the case at all.
The Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, to name the ones I know the best.
IMO no work that is done because you want to do it is degrading. I know that in the countries I mention (I know others but not well enough to feel I can make an informed statement) that exotic dancers, strippers and prostitutes can make really good money without physical danger or risk of disease.
It is almost literally the same job as actors in Hollywood. You get up on stage or have a 1 on 1 and pretend to be someone else for money. How far you want to go depends on you** SAG is the reason Hollywood actors are no exploited more than they are. Strippers in LA should have the same rights (as well as dancers and prostitutes).
** only by having legal rights and organizing can this statement be enforced. Adult actors don't "wing it" on camera. They have contracts that say EXACTLY what will be done, just like Brad Pitt in his movies.
To clarify, we're primarily talking about prostitution, not stripping or pornstars. In most countries, strip clubs and porn productions are already legal. While I think that abuse of prostitutes or strippers should be treated the same as any other crimes under the law, I'm undecided on the idea of legalising prostitution. I don't have a negative perception of prostitutes, but don't think that it's a desirable situation for women and wouldn't shed a tear if it were to disappear tomorrow.
While legalising prostitution may have some benefits in terms of health and safety, these may be transitory as Germany and the Netherlands indicate.
How many strippers, pornstars and prostitutes do you honestly believe "want to do it", as opposed to resorting to these trades as a last resort, or a result of coercion? It beggars belief that you would think that the majority of women in these professions "want to do it". Getting naked for the pleasure of a stranger, grinding on a stranger or getting f*cked by a stranger is almost definitionally degrading, as the woman is subordinated to the desires of a random who throws a few dollars their way.
Lastly, regardless the status of prostitution or strip clubs, abuses still occur and diseases are still very much at issue. You said you had knowledge of the regimes and conditions in those countries you mentioned, but I wonder what you've been reading. In additional the excerpts below, you should also look at: "legalization of prostitution is a violation of human rights" (https://www.nlg.org/nlg-review/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/11/NLGRev-68-2-Final.pdf).
In Germany: "In 2017, following lobbying from feminists and testimony from police officers about the rising levels of criminality and violence under the legal regime, the government introduced a number of restrictions: pimps were no longer allowed to dictate which “services” the women should provide to punters; brothel owners had to apply for a licence; and punters were mandated to use condoms.
“Of course, there was no way of enforcing these regulations,” Angie*, a German sex trade survivor tells me. “Pimps are criminals who just want to make money, and [punters] can’t be made to put on a condom. We still had to do what we were told.”"
"One man said: “There was one [pimp] who really beat up one of his women. With the fist two or three times in the face and thrown her against the wall.” Another reported: “When the women didn’t pay the pimp enough, they had their fingernails pulled off, or they beat the women to a pulp. The women were scared and never said anything.”
The sex buyers showed little to no empathy towards the women. “It’s like having a cup of coffee, when you’re done you throw it out,” said one. “It’s like renting an organ for 10 minutes,” said another."
"When the Pussy Club opened near Stuttgart in 2009, the management advertised the club as follows: 'Sex with all women as long as you want, as often as you want and the way you want. Sex. Anal sex. Oral sex without a condom. Three-ways. Group sex. Gang bangs.' The price: 70 euros during the day" (Der Spiegel archived page to avoid ads: https://archive.ph/RgDZ7)
--------------------------
In Netherlands:
"When the Dutch government legalized prostitution in 2000, it was purportedly to protect sex workers by giving them work permits.[5] However, authorities now fear that this business is out of control: “We’ve realized this is no longer about small-scale entrepreneurs, but those big crime organizations are involved here in trafficking women, drugs, killings, and other criminal activities,” said Job Cohen, the former mayor of Amsterdam.[6] Over the years, officials have noticed an increase in violence centered on this irregular industry, and have blamed this increase on the illegal immigration of individuals into Amsterdam to participate in the sex industry.[7] . . .
In 2017, it was estimated by the Dutch National Rapporteur on Trafficking in Human Beings and Sexual Violence against Children that more than 6,000 people in the Netherlands fall victim to human trafficking each year.[9] Two thirds of the people trafficked, about 4,000 people per year, fall victim to sexual slavery and abuse.[10] In 2016, the mayor of Amsterdam admitted, for the first time, that the Dutch experiment to curb abuse by legalizing prostitution had failed miserably."
Agreed. The only reason a man -- and let's also be honest and admit that 99.99999% of the clients of sex workers are male -- is because he's too lazy and disgusting to have a relationship with a real woman. The ability to abuse woman is ALL of the appeal of going to a sex worker. He gets off on humiliating another human.
1. There is no such thing. Any man can find a woman if he takes a bath and brushes his teeth every day. She might not be a supermodel — and all men think the world owes them supermodels — but she will be human company.
The usual emotional blackmail to get women agree with you doesn't work. How come women "not attractive enough" do not seek male prostitutes?
The idea that only akward men use women in prostitution is a myth. Many powerful or good looking men also use women in prostitution. It's about power, not sex.
Objectifying a human being is a horrible thing to do.
So i am the prude by another poster for arguing that men should treat women with respect and never abuse them? Funny its always worked for me with beneficial outcomes. i think I can live with the stigma but makes me very sad that so many feel differently.
Maybe the “prude” (haven’t seen that word in a while) comment was for your issue with the term sex worker. Abuse of anyone is horrible. And you certainly aren’t acting like a Karen, like Karen above.
I’m not convinced that properly regulated sex work can’t be a safe, functioning industry.
well i baited that by bringing the word into play myself. But i do not see how this industry does not turn into abuse one way or the other. One fair criticism I received is the use of the word being preferential to the actual "workers." My objection was that term being adopted by the wokerati to make this sound like something it isn't. But I certainly do not object to workers using that term to retain some dignity.
Your first point about High Profile = deadbeat Dads
2nd Abuse = asshole men
I don't buy the A LOT. and not to be critical but exactly how many women are in A LOT? (Sorry its the CEO in me, when a person told me we were going to sell A LOT, I immediately discounted what they said.)
There is a common theme that comes to your final point - men will always have sex drives. That is a healthy thing but they need to be focused on positive outcomes. That means a society that values women and does not objectify them as sex objects that can be purchased and/or abandoned and one that imbues responsibility in men for how they treat their partners and the results thereof. as a guy, it bothers me to no end how men have been allowed to abuse women and abandon their children. this is not civilized society if we allow that.
Very well put DMC. I often wonder how these women who think like JennyStokes would really feel if the circumstances were personalized. For example, one has an 18yr old son and he thinks he should spend his hard earned money on a prostitute who could possibly be part of a trafficking enterprise. Also, she claims that single mothers who work in high profile escort agencies are trying to make a living. How is sex work conducive to making a better life for your children? Would one want that child to grow up and be involved in that industry? I don’t understand the mindset of women who fail to consider that they may be encouraging the perpetuation of an industry that is destructive to families. I’ll stand proudly with you as a possible “prude”.
there is a lot to be said there. I try not to be judgmental of any individual. It is not anyway comparable as at least for my part I have been blessed, but nevertheless we have all taken jobs or tasks that really sucked in order to move forward. So, these people have my sympathy, but I reject the concept of normalizing, let alone glamorizing the business.
what mystifies me is that I have been basically called out for pointing out the source of the problem. the behavior of my fellow men. it bothers me to no end that the net beneficiaries of this is the scumbags and losers that use and abuse women and never take responsibility for a damn thing. It is one of the major civilizational problems we have at it why people who espouse classical liberal have found themselves politically homeless.
I do not, but in the back and forth nature of these chats I can see how I can step over my own points. Especially when it gets a bit edgy.
My default position on prostitution and drugs has basically been libertarian. The demand is there and someone will supply it. Legal or not. To the extent this can be done without any cost to society, so be it. However, I do think there is an attempt to downplay the costs of this approach and to normalize, and in some cases glamorize the business. I can abide the Vice but don't tell me its a Virtue.
I sense you may have read "Last Call" or similar literature about Prohibition because I take your point. the forces that came together at that point had valid concerns about the carnage that alcohol was inflicting on society (mostly women) but the solutions created a whole new set of problems that we are still dealing with (how come nobody ever mentions the income tax?)
bottom line the, shifting, point I am making is that I am having second thoughts on my libertarian position. With drugs, i think the benefits of legalization of have been oversold and the costs ignored. We have a serious addiction/homeless problem and we need to have more innovative solutions, (and this is a problem that hits me personally) It cannot be all carrots or all sticks. Prostitution is often linked to this issue and the main point to my argument here is to protect the, mostly women, and address the demand side so that women are protected both medically and physically. sadly , i do not have any perfect solutions.
That’s like posting a sympathetic BLM or Defund the Police sign in a toney white neighborhood where you don’t have to live with the consequences of your virtue signaling. Many of these girls are trafficked, or homeless or drug addicted. Like any cartel victims, they have to pay protection money to men who have total control over their lives. It is not a “profession “ and little girls don’t grow up thinking they want strange men fondling their bodies multiple times a night.
Giving them health insurance and union cards changes none of this. If you really care about these girls, give them an opportunity at the kind of life you have. How? It’s simple - arrest the Johns and publish their faces so their wives, families and co-workers can see them, and support organizations that attempt to help these (mostly) women live productive happy lives in the mainstream of our society.
Sex work may be “the oldest profession”, it’s also a profession that has been associated with slavery as long as it has existed, and is the one “profession” I can think of that has brought slavery on a massive scale with it into the marrow of 21st century modern societies.
Ha! How come they have to import impoverished women from Eastern Europe and Africa (etc.) who are basically entrapped? All sweetness and light, eh??
Following from Wikipedia- but most of us know this shit already!
[When the Dutch government legalized prostitution in 2000, it was to protect the women by giving them work permits, but authorities now fear that this business is out of control: "We've realized this is no longer about small-scale entrepreneurs, but those big crime organizations are involved here in trafficking women, drugs, killings, and other criminal activities", said Job Cohen, the former mayor of Amsterdam.[4]
More recently, officials have noticed an increase in violence centered on this irregular industry, and have blamed this increase on the illegal immigration of individuals into Amsterdam to participate in the sex industry: "The guys from Eastern Europe bring in young and frightened women; they threaten them and beat them", said a resident of De Wallen.[4] Prostitution has remained connected to criminal activities, which has led the authorities to take several measures, including detailed plans to help the prostitutes quit the sex trade and find other professions.[citation needed]]
“There no such thing s as a free lunch.” Free health care means taxpayer funded health care ... taxation is theft. Seriously. Not that I doubt her your point, but my point will always be “government funded anything is 98% bureaucratic waste”
Countries in Europe often have public or mixed healthcare systems. Are those public pensions, or specifically for those in the sex trade? Are they paying taxes or making pension contributions? I'd be surprised if governments would incentivize sex work by providing special benefits to the industry.
Indeed, it is incorrect to call this a "victimless crime."
The "sex workers" themselves are the primary victims, but so are their "clients" who in the process degrade themselves as well. And society suffers as the "industry" demotes sex from a loving relationship to a commercial transaction.
The one in the black fishnets had a huge bruise on the left side of her face like she caught a big right hook. It might have been makeup. Another one had what looked like a painted-on bullet hole in her forehead. But by contrast, the bruise looked totally authentic.
Sad that they are advocating for remaining in this situation.
By definition the poor souls who have no choice are not workers but have been trafficked. They did try to make this distinction. The people who are unionizing are workers. I have no right to sit in judgement over their choices or their reasons.
I did not follow too much. too sad of a subject for me. i do think even those unionizing are likely in a grey area, at best, when it came to choices, but I cannot be sure of that.
Your basic approach of being morally neutral and non-judgmental is one that I have followed in the past. However, its hard not to look at the results of that approach and see we have lost something. I was really struck by a talk I saw about the homeless/addicts situation in SF by Michael Schellenberger where he came to the conclusion that based on what is happening it could no longer be said that we live in a civilized society. I think the same could be said about our approach to prostitution and its adjacencies.
As a former sex worker, I definitely prefer the term sex worker to prostitute or hooker. Prostitute is a word meant to degrade. No disrespect, but there’s a lot of us who prefer sex worker, whether we’ve been “trafficked” into the business or did it of our own volition. If you’ve never actually done the job, your opinion of the words we prefer doesn’t matter.
By the way, there are many other industries that people are trafficked into, fisheries for one. But they don’t get the headlines sex trafficking does because they don’t aren’t as salacious and don’t get as many clicks. In the twenty plus years I spent in the sex industry, the majority of the people I met doing the work were there because it pays 100x better than any other “square” job they could get. The girls that were “trafficked” had what used to be called a pimp, a man who pretends to be in love with a woman to get her to enter the industry and give him all her profits.
The mainstream media is lying about the human trafficking problem, in the same why they lie about everything else. All prostitution arrests are now labeled “human trafficking busts.” Look beyond the salacious headline and you’ll almost always see it’s just a bunch of men and women arrested for prostitution. Take a look at all the BS anti-trafficking “charities.” There’s one run by Cindy McCain that especially ridiculous that helps no one except the layers of useless bureaucrats who run it. The only help they offer women who want to leave the industry is body wash or a Panera gift card. Not a job that actually pays a living wage or affordable housing or childcare.
Read up on Tim Ballard. He’s the exact type of person you’d expect to find in an “anti-trafficking organization.” Doing more harm than good
Your comment reads like contradictory nonsensical bullshit.
You state here:
“the majority of the people I met doing the work were there because it pays 100x better than any other “square” job they could get.”
This suggests it is a conscious, voluntary decision.
Then later you say:
“The only help they offer women who want to leave the industry is body wash or a Panera gift card. Not a job that actually pays a living wage or affordable housing or childcare.”
If they willingly enter sex work, why is it anyone else’s obligation, moral or otherwise, to get them out?
If that is true, why should anyone care about someone that discarded a “square” job because of greed and materialistic consumerism? You’re painting a picture of people that willingly enter an “industry” rife with violence, abuse, corruption and depravity simply to make “100 X more”.
You then go on to imply that all, not some, but “all prostitution arrests are now labeled “human trafficking busts.”” How do you know this? Do you have evidence to support this claim, or are you being hyperbolic for effect?
It seems like you’re saying trafficking is overstated because simple prostitution is now labeled trafficking regardless of whether or not it’s being forced or coerced.
And which “protective” laws are you talking about? Be specific.
Ok so if it isn’t anyone’s job to get them out, why are there so many non-profit organizations determined to do just that ?
There are numerous non-trafficking organizations that claim that is what they are trying to do, yet like so many NGO’s they help no one but the useless bureaucrats that run them.
Did you miss the part where I said “willingly”, as in not coerced, or of one’s own volition? It’s well known that this “industry” is full of violence and depravity- the industry thrives on it. So if one enters it willingly, simply because more money can be made, that’s where my sympathy ends. The same argument could be made for drugs. Should they all be made legal, particularly from a pure libertarian perspective? Absolutely. Would there be less violence if a black market system that had to operate outside of legal confines did not exist? Almost certainly. That, however, is not reality. If I give up my day job to sell drugs illegally in an industry and environment that I know is dangerous and violent, simply because I can make more money, that would make me an idiot, not a victim.
Victims are the ones forced into the industry and forced to stay there. You do yourself and *actual* victims zero favors by conflating victims with idiots. They are two very different circumstances. Someone that says “wow I can make 100x as much slinging ass as I can as an admin assistant or accountant or whatever” and enters that lifestyle willingly cannot and should not be compared with minors and women that are often times kidnapped, trafficked, etc into that life against their will.
This flawed, shallow, simplistic, binary train of thought is typical blathering nonsense from a bleeding heart that doesn’t have the intellectual acumen to engage in nuance, realize two things can be true simultaneously, and look at things for what they truly are. Good luck with that. Seems to be going swimmingly so far.
The “fault” of someone that enters an industry of dubious legality and chock full of atrocity, deliberately and willingly is their own- particularly if they do it for purposes of greed or materialism, and especially if other lower paying but safer and legal alternatives are available. This is the part where you attack my morality and make assumptions of what my demography and background and identity is. That’s what comes next, right? Go.
One point I made I need to clarify. I criticized the term sex worker as being applied by activists and people outside that profession. . If that is what people in that line of work prefer that is their right and prerogative. I did not mean to give imply that was wrong..
You implied the majority of people you ran into were in the business for better pay, but if you don't mind, what would you estimate is the ratio of sex workers pursuing the career of their own volition vs the workers you define as "trafficked"?
I’d say 80% of the women I met were there on their own volition. 20% had a pimp posing as a boyfriend. I’ve never met anyone who was kidnapped or forced into the work by a random stranger. That’s a rare occurrence and contrary to popular belief there is not a huge market for terrified women who don’t actually want to be there. Go read The Erotic Review. Most men who consider themselves “hobbyists,” (a gross term men who frequently use the services of sex workers have given themselves) want a woman who’s totally into it or can at least pretend to be for an hour or so.
Thanks Sherry, your perspective is really helpful.
If you’ll humor me one more question, what can be done from a legal sense to help the 20% of women who work at the behest of the pimp/boyfriend? I think we probably have different opinions regarding this issue, but I’m sure we agree that nobody should be coerced into sex work for any reason. As you see it, what can be done to help the minority of workers who are not involved of their own free will?
So, how many sex workers do you know? Or is everything you're saying based on pure speculation and/or media reports (which are going to be deeply biased due to the illegal nature of the business)?
What do you think happens when a Conference comes to Town, mostly men?
20 percent of the men call Escort agency's.
Escort Agency's are proper agency's often run by women. They build up a supposedly good clientele base but of course some of the clients they do not know.
One is supposed to Escort the lone man to dinner etc.
I have known many women (who also have jobs) do this work and it is NOT just escorting men to dinner.
All those people in Washington/congress people etc. Living away from homes???????
There are a huge amount of extremely good looking women some working as models where work is not always available so they do escort work on the side.
You can believe me or not I don't care.
Down the ladder it does become more complex because yes there are nefarious people who exploit women. Not a job for women without 'street smarts'.
IF you had free medical check-ups and mental care and made this job a profession most of these 'pimps' would not be around.
I remember walking down a street in Geneva and one woman said 'hello' to my husband. I told her 'sorry he's taken'. We both laughed.
Take away the mystique and the problem is mostly a lot better.
Sex Work is Work is just wokeified feminism. "Sex work" is woke NewSpeak for people today to pretend exploitation is "work", so idiots safely selling fantasies like "cam girls" and "working" on OnlyFans can try to retain some pretense of self worth while making money from other idiots willing to pay for it. Meanwhile, prostitutes in the lowest social class are hidden and forgotten. No amount of "unionizing" will save them. Sex trafficked victims have even less hope of ever being rescued and saved as their pimps and whatever organized crime syndicate that own them use "sex work" and related "protective" laws to serve as cover to get away with what they're doing.
Seriously, Matt, this is what you're spending time reporting on? The woke got to you now too by their ideas of "sex work"?
So true. So called “sex work”, be it strip clubs or prostitution, has been under mob control for ever. It’s part of destructive seedy underbelly of society. The women, girls and young men are indeed exploited and abused daily. Even if they do “unionize”, the union boss will likely be a pimp and will extort even more money and favors from them than the creep who owns the club.
If sex work is legal and regulated it will become like other jobs, just with a happy end. Prostitution is legal in many countries around the world, many in Europe where I've lived and worked for 30 years. Sure there is still exploitation and crime, but it is similar to other jobs where there is exploitation and crime, like construction, food delivery.
Legalizing it in America only makes it impossible for police to approach potential sex trafficking victims to be saved and rescued. Michael Shellenberger reported in detail on this in San Francisco.
I don't actually believe everything is all fine and dandy in Europe, but I don't know enough about what goes on there to comment. But even if I take your word for it, laws are not one size fits all. Just because it works fine somewhere else doesn't mean it'd work fine here. Censorship and government suppression of free speech and free press works all fine in China too. So it'll work just fine here? Just legalize it?
Your first statement is factually incorrect. It is the equivalent of saying if we make construction work legal it makes it impossible for INF to check if workers are illegal immigrants.
I read the Shellenberger article till the paywall, and most of the study it is based on. Did you read the study? It very clearly says that liberalizing the legalization of prostitution in Germany in 2002 did NOT lead to an increase of human trafficking. What it did lead to, and the subject of this post by Racket News, is that all the people working in prostitution had legal protections, unemployment insurance, pensions, health insurance, and unionization - to name a few important points.
I also take great issue with the 150 countries included in the study list for the reason I gave in my comment from 4 January to your same comment. Including countries with a vastly different legal system and/or form of government, e.g. China, Pakistan, Thailand, Saudi Arabia will skew the results proportionally away from what results of legalization in the US would look like. Saudi Arabia is Muslim Kingdom. Does anyone think that comparing prostitution / human traficking in Saudi Arabia will provide useful insights for Nebraska?
I've downloaded the study and have started reading it. My prejudice is clear, but I'm trying to be as objective as possible.
Your comparison between EU and the US vs. US and China is flawed, IMO. US law and legal culture is extremely close to EU law and legal culture. Chinese law and legal culture, let alone social culture, is extremely different to the US. Thus a legal idea that works well in Europe has a much higher chance of success in the US than a legal idea from China. I've lived in multiple EU countries, traveled to most all and worked in most over the last 30 years. Legal prostitution is a non-issue in West/Central Europe in my experience, but I must admit that this comes almost exclusively from 2nd hand knowledge and discussions, not from me making empirical studies.
Germany, where it is "regulated" is hell for women in prostitution. Only the poorest, migrant, helpless end up there, desperate and/or coerced, even if it's now "legal". Sweden and France criminalise pimps and johns, so it's good for the women. It is not "similar" to other jobs at all in any European countries. You're making that up.
I'm most definitely not making it up. I know people directly who have worked in the business in multiple countries. Poor, migrant and helpless people are exploited in all countries. Keeping the poor, migrant and helpless from organizing their labor only assures that they will continue to be exploited.
Prostitution is akin to slavery, not labour. It's exploitation. Helping the poor, migrant and helpless from being exploited is the goal, and that means helping them getting out of the slavery/prostitution system. Regulation only benefits pimps and johns.
That is simply not true. Trafficking is akin to slavery, and it should be stopped. Prostitution is not slavery any more than picking tomatoes is slavery. The existence of human trafficking and forced labor in both industries is not a reason to bar the laborers in those industries from organizing their labor.
The issue here is not even prostitution. It is stripping. The women in the video are all in the industry voluntarily. They have a right to organize their labor in the US.
I worked in the sex industry for many years as an independent Dominatrix. SESTA and FOSTA were passed in 2018 so I don’t understand why these girls are bringing that up now. One of the worst results of those laws was the closure of Backpage.com (Kamala Harris mainly behind this at the time). Everyone booked sessions from backpage ads so that was a huge blow.
Sex workers are supposed to be flexible and adapt. If all you judgmental people don’t like “sex worker” then whore, hoe, girl, whatever you prefer. It doesn’t matter, the profession is going nowhere and is fueled 90% by married men.
As for the strippers, they may be bringing a mindset that may undermine them in the end.
agree I have made the point above (or below.) Dare I say how many of these "workers" are flowing in over the border every day with no one to protect them at all? I hope there is a special place in hell for all of the people who have made this possible.
Ultimately, its on the demand side. And we have a long long way to go. But i do want to make clear that i put no cuplability on the providers. they are the innocent
Looking at the demand side is definitely a smart approach. Same consideration would be helpful in dealing with abuse of drugs, abortion, and undocumented workers, which we’ve proved cannot be limited by bans on supply.
yeah what bothers me in this case the suppliers are prosecuted and the demanders get their hands slapped. versus the drugs et al, the individual suppliers are very limited in their offering.
Being a cam girl showing your face is definitely going to lower your chances of becoming an excecutive at H&M. Other than that, what the hell do you care if a girl or guy makes money showing their junk to people willing to pay for it? It has ZERO affect on what you do with your money.
Idiots spend their money on things all the time. Lots of things I find idiotic.
This is a labor issue. These are workers trying to organize. More power to them.
If your focus is the "workers" in the video and not prostitutes in the lowest strata of society who are selling their bodies because they have no other choice or sex trafficked victims, then you are missing my point.
Interesting you're so concerned about them but not a single peep from you about prostitutes who actually need help. And yes, sex trafficked victims do in fact need to be saved. If you think they don't, then I have nothing more to say to you as your moral compass is too far off the chart.
I get your point. I just completely disagree with you and your point of view. You use the word "save" multiple times in your comment. Those workers in the video don't need or want to be saved. They just want to organize so they can stop being exploited. Pretty simple.
Woke and feminism are antagonistic. Feminists work for the abolition of prostitution (not "criminalisation"; check out the "Nordic Model" to see what I mean).
Woke are a Trojan Horse in this matter as they are in many others. They pretend they care while all they do is making things worse for everyone else.
There is in fact a brand of woke feminism that is not feminism as you understand it. In left wing space it is called liberal feminism, which pushes woke ideas like "intersectional feminism", "choice feminism" (a concept where a tiny group of privileged women who can afford luxury belief of "Sex Work is Work" to capitalize of making money in the safety of their own homes behind cameras while pushing for laws and "rights" that validate themselves but will lead to detriment of prostitutes walking the streets under control of pimps and mobs), and first world problems like "micro-aggression", as well as "Believe All Women!" even if it means never looking into whether the allegations are false, unless it's the wrong kind of women, like Jewish women brutally raped and killed by terrorists, or maybe Republican women. Then suddenly they don't "Believe All Women" anymore. They just go radio silent. "Toxic masculinity" may fall under the purview of this brand of woke feminism too. None of it has much to do with actually advocating for women or women's basic human rights and equality.
I know what the Nordic model is. It is not part of this brand of woke liberal feminism.
good points and I run the risk of opining on something I am not sully versed in (but what are these boards for? lol) but when ever someone throws a model based on Scandinavia I immediately discount. Not because it does not work for them as it likely does and probably is something i would agree with. the problem is you are dealing with a high trust homogenous society. it is easier to enact these types of policies and those defying them are isolated. I would love things to be that way here but they arent and the change required is centuries away.
But.....Sweden's experiment with mass immigration rom a different culture may be a great test for my theory.
It's not based on anything cultural. The Nordic model is called that way because it was first implemented in Sweden. That's it. Nothing to do with the rest of policies they might have there. What they implemented was criminalising pimps and johns, not the women, who are helped to exit prostitution. It's called "model" because the idea is to take it as a template for other countries when establishing policies about prostituted women, as opposed to "regulation", which is a Trojan Horse against the women, in favour of pimps and johns.
Sex work as a phrase has been around for decades before 'wokeism' or whatever other hyped term you'd like to use to show us your total ignorance about the actual facts that Matt presents.
Sure, let's play word games and argue about semantics, a favorite pass time of the woke. This way we can all remain blindly ignorant of the vast majority of people, mostly poverty-stricken women, drug addicts, and minors, who are being harmed and exploited as prostitutes, but will become even more invisible while everyone pretends their problems are solved and their lives are improved because they're now just doing "work" and there'll be "unions" and "labor rights" for them. Shall we play pronoun games next?
All jokes aside, I wish these people well in their efforts to organize and to fight laws that endanger their lives and their livelihoods. BTW, I have a friend who does this for a living (she's a fetish model), so I understand what's at stake. My Dad was a fanatic about unions, so that also makes me sympathetic.
Many thieves consider themselves as sort of entrepreneurs, and Hamas soldiers certainly consider themselves gainfully employed and are paid. Some homeless people work, some don't, but many have a routine that they consider their daily chores. I think you get my point. Unionization doesn't change behaviors, it just institutionalizes them and adds another layer of fees the girls have to pay (in the case of prostitution). Health checks, on the other hand, are a no brainer and should be encouraged regardless of any activity's legal status.
Perhaps a union for professional social media commenters, colloquially referred to as "trolls?" The hookers of the internet? World Wide Web Whores unite! And organize!
Sea Sentry is an idiot. I already blocked him, which is what I do with idiots who make idiotic replies to my post, so he won't read this, but I just wanted to let others know.
From where I’m standing, it’s quite the opposite. Your “I’m right because of my epistemic isolation, and anyone who disagrees is an idiot” ain’t ever going to win over any real thinkers. I wouldn’t be surprised though if you are the smartest person your fetish model friend knows, you might have that going for you…
I'm an American living in Austria for 30 years. When I first arrived here in the 90s and had to get my work permit updated often, I would spend quite some time waiting (pre-internet days!) at the local government office. For a period of time, the office where I waited was down the hall from where sex workers (prostitution is legal in Austria) would have to go VERY regularly to prove they were disease-free and get their cards stamped so they could go to work. I would listen to the girls chat about the clubs where they worked; which clubs were good, which were bad. Which managers were creeps or assholes and who was cool.
To my young, fresh-from-the-US male mind this was salacious at first. After only a few minutes it was mundane. It was like any other workers discussing their jobs. That is exactly the point. Sex work is just like any other work, if you take out puritanical prejudices. "My body my choice" applies here just like with abortion. If a woman or man wants to sell their body - willingly and being of legal age - it is no one's business but theirs. Sex workers should have the same workers' rights just like people making potato chips or Teslas.
Denying sex workers rights makes the possibility for exploitation and crime MUCH higher.
Your last sentence is spot on. Doesn’t justify going to one ... morally, ethically, socially, etc. But criminalizing the behavior merely makes “targeted enforcement” (against your enemies) possible
I don't know what you mean "justify." I knew a guy for many years who was a high paid executive for a large 3 letter US firm. He wanted sex but not a relationship (long story). So he went to a brothel regularly. He was very satisfied and the girls made great money.
Just noting that if it’s legal (probably should be) it does not automatically make it “justifiable.” People answer to all sorts of other people ... parents, spouses, kids, colleagues, etc. Crossing that line may cause tremendous chaos ... and that may suck so much as to make crossing the line unjustifiable
Definitely agree. My wife and I both agree that prostitution being legal (here in Austria) is a good thing, and believe legalization and tough regulation is better than it being illegal - note I haven't read the study linked above yet that may change my mind.
All that being said, despite what my wife says, I really doubt she'd be OK with me going to see a prostitute "just for sex." To the point that I wouldn't think about risking the "tremendous chaos" even if I felt that our sex life was unsatisfactory (which is fortunately not at all the case). So I agree with you there fully.
For (particularly) young men with no partner, I think going to a prostitute is a really good solution.
I’ve not been to a strip club since college. After watching some of these “topless entertainers” there’s a 100% chance I’ll never darken the door of one ever again. My god.....Is there a way to unsee any of this?
Love the little tune played by Tom Morello where he references well documented communist Cesar Chavez……ya just can’t fix stupid folx.
There’s nothing like a well documented communist to start the day.
But were you referring to well documented Cezar Chavez, the leader of the agriculture workers strike in the 60’s, or well documented Hugo Chavez, of Venezuela? And why do you think Morello is stupid for referencing whichever one you’re referring to?
You might want to watch that video again & get some glasses. I'm as straight as they come and enjoy looking at beautiful woman as much as the next guy, but have no desire to see any of these women naked. But hey....you do you.....
The first, best step to better, and safer working conditions is to legalize all consensual activity, period full stop. The issues of abuse, by both customers and handlers is because of the dynamic of prohibition. This is on top of the invasions of privacy and the opportunities for police corruption that are endemic to an outlawed trade.
If you are morally queasy about this business, I get it. However, the answer is to use moral suasion to encourage these people to follow a different path, not to outlaw consensual behavior because you don't like the choices people make. That path always causes more problems than it solves.
that is the libertarian argument and it does make some sense. Where it falls off is where you refer to "moral suasion." It never happens. Once "legal" it becomes "moral." Same has happened to marijuana legalization, (which i supported.) I see none of the benefits i anticipated, just a bunch of perpetually stoned (and smelly) people and cities that smell like skunk.
we are dealing with civilizational decline here and could use some "moral suasion" but anyone who makes that argument is ridiculed as a prude by people to lazy too get off the couch, get in shape, and get a decent job that will allow you to find a suitable partner that will give you the sex life, and more, that will give you real satisfaction.
No need to apologize, we all need to rant now and then. 😊 That said, it is a statist trap; I think to conflate legal with moral. That is the basis for all manner of policies that strip people of moral agency and denudes their rights. If we keep government to protecting people’s persons and property, then we have a better chance of escaping this trap. Peace.
the problem is i agree with you!! Which leaves us in a quandry. the state does conflate the moral with the legal and i do not trust the government to content itself with just protecting people's god-given rights and property. They won the war with God and now see themselves as the only moral authority
At least not a quandary between us, since we agree! We just both need to fight the good fight in limiting the power of the state and point out to the world that it is a competing worship center and encouraging others to a better, more peaceful path.
I've had family living in the suburbs around Denver for 20 years now (we're MT people)
if weed legalization has made the place significantly worse, I fail to see how
It's still nice there when I visit, and call me an idealist, but I think it's nice knowing nobody is in prison or jail over weed and that I'm not gonna get arrested for a vape pen or a couple bowls in a baggy or things like that which we used to worry about
I have relatives in CO, NV, TX, FL, NC. Colorado and Nevada are
great (x-the recent CO Supreme Court/Trump nonsense). There are moralizers everywhere who will always be anti-weed. There will be plenty of anti-beer, anti-interracial dating, anti-gay people around as well. They will naturally see more “this place has gone to shit” things in states that disagree with them on weed, abortion, name the issue.
NYer here. Have nothing against weed (except how stupid and checked out it makes many people!) But since we legalized it here- the stench has become so prevalent- on streets, in CVS, in the Metropolitan Museum of Art!!! Ferchrissakes! Is nowhere safe from the skunk smell?
As someone who has lived here off and on since '90, I can say that I do not encounter weed on a regular basis in public any more than before. Many people use at home, use edibles, whatever, but in public it is similar to what I smelt previously.
What has changed is that the drastic increase in homelessness, especially working families, as the cost of living has sky rocketed over the past 10 years. Also a massive increase in the chronically homeless population which takes over previously lovely urban parks and trails. Many of these people probably initially came for the legal weed, but not anymore. Cost living has gone sky high ($2500 a month of a decent 2 bedroom apartment, not a great one) and wages have not kept pace, which leads to more crime, more homelessness, and less safety.
Schools are chronically underfunded becuase the weed money allocated to them means the general assembly spends an equivalent amount elsewhere. And all of our property taxes just doubled because cost of living has increased the residential valuations. Further emiserating the local population.
I miss being a purple state. I miss when our politicians had to actually compromise. One party rule always leads to ideological garbage solutions.
I do not have reporting handy for it. I volunteer on a board within my school district, and it is something we have discussed, especially recently with the property tax increases. I am working with my state Senator and Representative to make sure it doesn't happen this time, as most of our property taxes go to the school districts. Maybe I can dig up some older reporting.
I do not have any standard of comparison. The only states i have been spent a lot of time in have legalized. My point was that the benefits that I, as a supporter, anticipated were not realized. (please spare me the statistics. If there has been a revenue windfall, the govs promptly wasted it.)
Please, and i said I was for it, but if you go to that angle, you do know that those are often plea deals from more serious crimes?
Look I know people are touchy about this. My attitude is generally libertarian. I see the case for recreational use, same as and likely less dangerous than alcohol, and have no problem with that. (I do wish people would not stink up the joint and would notice how bad they smell but that's my preference. i feel the same way about tobacco.) But my main point is with regard to MJ was the benefits were oversold/and the down side undersold. It was part of a point about conflating the moral with the legal but we are WAY down the rabbit hole from there!! lol
I'm not saying the commercialization was the right thing. But it's apparently what some political thinkers felt had to happen to get the right thing (ie, an end to marijuana prohibition) done. It's interesting to think about why that is. Were they afraid that if every weed shop didn't look like a Starbucks, legalization would turn into like the Whiskey Rebellion again? Fuck if I know lol
If we gave each and every person between the ages of 10-13 a brand new exotic sports car, you could expect that gift to be treated a lot of different ways. Some people would fire it up and use it before they were old enough to see over the steering wheel. Some people might skip the maintenance schedule. Some people would take it off-roading. Some people might rent it out to any old person willing pay the going fee. Some people might have their keys taken and have their car abused/monetized by others. Certainly a few people would build a shrine around it and hardly let themselves acknowledge they own something so nice.
It’s an imperfect analogy, but I see human sexuality like that. It’s a priceless gift to the recipient, but it will only stay nice as long as you use it in a mature, responsible way. Conversely it can become an idol to be worshipped instead of a gift to be enjoyed. In other words, don’t feed your pearls to pigs, but don’t spend your whole life clutching them either.
It’s not like this in much of the developing world, but many people who choose sex work as a vocation in the US could make perfectly fine money working a normal job. Certainly the people who are smart enough to organize labor movements could leverage that intelligence into meaningful careers. If people want to monetize their naughty bits with other consenting adults, that’s their choice, it’s a free country, blah blah blah… but they should own the consequences, and there will always be consequences with this kind of work. The myth is that we can take away those consequences with a few new laws. Pass whatever law you want, people who sell what is precious will have forever lost that which is precious.
Yes: “ It’s a priceless gift to the recipient, but it will only stay nice as long as you use it in a mature, responsible way. Conversely it can become an idol to be worshipped instead of a gift to be enjoyed.”
1. No. I think you mean supply and demand. Strip clubs are not the Wild West, there are wages and tips, and clubs do their best to stiff workers on wages as well as dip into their tips. You ever been to a strip club with a 40 dollar cover? How much would you even have left over to tip the dancers?
2. Ideally safe would mean "don't have to worry about getting beat up or killed in or around the workplace." You know why OSHA standards exist? It's the same here.
3. I don't really see the connection. Do you think the poorest paid workers are blissfully unaffected by unfair hiring practices or something? Or are you thinking like "well pussy's pussy, why would anyone discriminate?"
You are assuming that all parties involved in sex work are of high ethical and moral character. Seriously? I also do mean "demand" only. Who wants sex from a sex worker? What does that psychological profile look like? I have some ideas, but it's kind of a tangent so I leave that to you to consider for yourself.
This whole story reminds me of the old adage "No honor among thieves" or "Sleep with dogs, don't be surprised you get fleas" (something like that), and I am no Puritan. :)
I don't think I have to assume anything about the personal or moral character of the workers or bosses to have an opinion on this
Although it may be true my opinion about how these disputes play out may be colored by conclusions I have drawn about management and labor from my many years in the workforce
I assume anybody who likes pussy (or oral sex or dick or ass, or whatever tbh) - but hates going on dates - is a potential patron of prostitutes. I don't feel the need to Mindhunter this stuff it's pretty straightforward
As for the rest, I myself have gone to strip clubs a bunch of times. In my opinion it's way better (read: more fun, less weird) in cities where workers have fought to influence the laws to make them less weird and puritanical, and where government and management have listened
I simply don't like Government getting involved in every facet of society. You invite them in to regulate and all of a sudden a new set of laws are introduced that nobody asked for. Be careful.
The only thing that will ever help American workers and by extension everyone outside the ruling classes and the officer classes is strong ethical trade unions. Eight years of obomber and no "Employee Free choice act". Three years of Biden and no Pro act. There's a reason the the ruling classes hate unions. They want "arbitrary power" and, of course more of the wealth. From fascist dictatorship to communist regimes, they're all the same. Not your friends. They own the organs of propaganda and convince you through the indocrination industrial complexes that unions are bad and "freedom" is good. Employment at will! Ultimately they want you at the "natural wages", just enough to keep you alive and producing wealth for THEM!
Unions do little for most workers. The private sector has to compete for the same workers and obviously (92% to 8% outside of government) does a better job. Unions are a 19th century story that have outlived their usefulness. They have devolved into an often corrupt political cartel that seeks to expand the power of union bosses. Want a less flexible, competitive and productive economy, with another layer of overlords? Vote union.
( I wroe above but applies to your comment, so i copied). as a senior executive i have to give at least one shout out for unions from my (management) perspective. that would be the unions that represent the trades. They offer apprenticeships training etc. they are easy to deal with. Is there BS/ yes. but there is always BS. Are they a bit more expensive? Yes but I am willing to bet on the quality, productivity, and efficiency advantage. The only job actions i ever saw was when some a hole was trying to work around them. They created value and delivered value and it was a good relationship and the workers were compensate fairly.
Public unions on the other hand are a cancer and the majors like UAW lost their way a long time ago.
Fair comments. With exceptions, the trade unions do a much better job of what unions can do that is productive. They’re more expensive as you say, which is why I’m in favor of right to work states where government contracts can be awarded based on overall value. In our state (California) prevailing wage rules apply. For all intents and purposes that means union labor. Here’s how it works here: unions fund political campaigns, elected officials award those unions lucrative contracts that are multiples of non-union companies. Rinse and repeat. Look at the amount of money the teachers unions, the SEIU and the prison guards unions spend on elections. Your accurate comments notwithstanding, this is a corrupt practice that taxpayers foot the bill for.
Oh I agree with you. as my post said the public unions like SEIU are a cancer and should be dissolved yesterday. the trades generally do not play those games. (Not as familiar with CA but doing a huge job in LA right now with no problems.) the prevailing wage may hold in those cases but they arent job killers. these are skilled guys making middle class wages which is a good thing.
ITs one of my bitches about the executive suite. Saving money for the sake of saving money and not assessing value. One of my favorite sayings (and its mine TM) is "most of the major screw ups I have seen in business started with someone trying to save a little money."
That's so true - I couldn't agree more. In our area we have thousands of immigrants (yes, mostly illegal) who work in the trades. While not as skilled, they will work for a fraction of a union wage. I wouldn't want them doing my engineering work, but for things like drywall, masonry, painting, etc. they do fine work. Of course, if we had some control over immigration on our southern border, "prevailing wages" would just be "wages" and American workers would benefit overall. I'd be fine with paying the higher price in that case. But I guess the people in Washington like a steady flow of unskilled labor to serve as their maids and gardeners. I'm surprised the unions don't push back more against open borders.
one of the many reasons the unions lost their credibility. they threw the american laborer under the bus to please Washington. But look how much housing prices went down due to savings from immigrant labor......oh wait.
I've been in unions. And walked picket lines. Watched agency temps cross our picket line as if it wasn't there.
While I don't dispute what you say I also think that unions shoot themselves in the foot.
A union is only as worthwhile as the folk who are in it.
The last "union" thing that I did at my weekend job was show up for an informational picket outside of the facility.
The only 2 people who bothered appearing were me & the union delegate who organized the picket. No one else showed up.
Let me tell you, being 1 part of a 2 person picket doesn't make make you look like you're part of a union as much as it makes you look you're one of two sad & disgruntled whiners.
I never walked a picket, but I was on both sides of the union issue: labor (CWA) and management (Teamsters). And I would take managements side every time at this point. Unions, as they are found in the USA, are destructive to both the workers and the business world.
None of which to say that I didn't have good union officers, or co-workers, but the whole enterprise is corrosive in the extreme. It gives extra pay for not working, not rocking the boat, and generally killing the golden goose, all because a bunch of people who cannot perform in the modern world work the political lines as opposed to the work line.
Yes, there was a time and place for them, but that is long gone, and now they are simply a drag on the economy.
The absolute bottom line for me was my bottom line. I did the math & realized that I was paying more in union dues than I was receiving in union benefits.
Granted the union gave us a grievance protocol to follow if we got in trouble but I never got in trouble so it was useless to me.
I remember how my union called me during Obama's 1st run & told me that I had to vote for him so he could "protect our wages."
I asked her to explain how he would protect our wages.
as a senior executive i have to give at least one shout out for unions from my (management) perspective. that would be the unions that represent the trades. They offer apprenticeships training etc. they are easy to deal with. Is there BS/ yes. but there is always BS. Are they a bit more expensive? Yes but I am willing to bet on the quality, productivity, and efficiency advantage. The only job actions i ever saw was when some a hole was trying to work around them. They created value and delivered value and it was a good relationship and the workers were compensate fairly.
Public unions on the other hand are a cancer and the majors like UAW lost their way a long time ago.
I believe in the idea of unions more so than the actual reality.
But I also believe the class war is pretty much over & the working class lost.
For now, at least.
The only folk who wouldn't cross our picket lines were truckers. 18 wheelers would screech to a halt once they saw the picket & be in the wind within minutes.
This is 100% garbage. Not the story itself, but what is occurring. It’s like the CA govt AND its citizens are actively and purposefully trying to make the state unlivable. I’m actually surprised there hasn’t been a bigger exodus. Govt trust is at an all time low (what a goddamned mystery that is, huh?) so I seriously doubt people are responding to or being accurate when they do respond to a census. That’s ok though, because when the entire thing gets to a state to where authoritarian intervention is the only thing that can save it, they can always blame that on the “fascist, homophobic, transphobic, xenophobic, racist right wing”. People need to wake the fuck up in 2024, stop playing the language game and push back against any iteration of this nonsense, however slight, unless they’d prefer the current degradation and devolution.
I don’t care if it’s novel phenomena or not. The government shouldn’t have to subsidize people selling their image sexually, or pleasure transactions vaginas or rectums or any other sexual act. Nor should they prohibit it. That’s my only point. Thought that was clear in my comment. I guess not. Let’s play a game called “guess how long before CA becomes Mad Max”. Have you been to any major downtown centers of metropolitan CA cities lately? Think things are going well?
To be honest, I think people shouldn't live in a couple of the major metro centers in California, and have thought so since I found out some of them were basically built on a desert. Hearing about people getting in fights over water rationing in the early oughts and teens reinforced that perspective for me. But no, I haven't gone down to visit in a while. I assume it's going about as well as a megalopolis teetering on the edge of a fault line siphoning water from the Colorado river (while constantly on fire in whole or in part) can be expected to though
I tend to be a bit skeptical about "falling apart" narratives though because I have actually lived in cities and I have noticed people tend to exaggerate horror stories and dystopian narratives about these places. PDX and Capitol Hill, Seattle, being a couple of examples: people talk about nonstop arsons and mob rule and people buying fentanyl from a Starbucks like it were an extra flavor in their latte, and then I go there all the time and I'm like "yeah it's basically fine. Nothing has changed."
I just put it down to people who don't live in cities really enjoy spanking the monkey while they fantasize about societal collapse for some reason.
Ive lived in major cities and seen them go downhill. I moved out specifically in 2019 because of that. One of my sons lives in what was once a very nice part of a major city that is going downhill fast. I do not like visiting him anymore. Its not shootouts on the streets or fentanyl at the Starbucks (but there are shootings) and life is still livable. (It does help to be 6'1" and 210 though) but as Jake says things are going to hell and its pretty clear the politicians care so little that one cant be blamed for assuming this is the planned outcome.
Injecting a little salacious skin & sin into the Racket paradigm, eh Matt? (Nudge, nudge, wink wink)
Never really developed a fondness for strip clubs although I do remember my first trip to one at about 18 when my "Oh boy oh boy oh boy I'm going to see some naked girls" enthusiasm took about 40 minutes to deteriorate into "Man this place sucks. The girls just look sad. These dudes are all skeezy looking and I'm pretty sure that dude at the end of the bar has his dick out & is rubbing one out right at this moment..."
Finished my beer and left.
Think I have about 5 more strip club drive bys in my past. All equally thrilling. I can safely say that not one of them looked like a Motley Crue video.
The last one happened because the guy my buddy & I were buying weed from wanted to meet at a strip bar. While my buddy chatted to him I checked out the crowd & the girls, momentarily making eye contact with a short little Asian guy. Before I knew it the little guy was sitting next to me rubbing my boot with his wingtips. I said, "What the fuck are you doing?" He said, "Oh, Oh, I'm sorry. It's a mistake. A mistake." And he was gone.
To be fair that wasn't the last one. Later in life, when my brother's marriage was imploding, he started hanging at a strip club all of the time. He eventually scored a bouncer gig there being a sizable fellow. So I met some strippers. Discovered that the majority of them were single moms. Many of them were lesbians. And a great number of both lesbian & straight didn't have a high opinion of men. So, if strip bars are your thing, while you're sitting there staring at her boobs and convincing yourself she really wants your man meat, try to keep in mind that she's probably thinking of assorted ways she'd like to see your dumb ass kick the bucket.
A good thought to share here also, thanks for it. I guess it’s not wild to see creeps white kniting for ‘’sex workers’’, I mean thats exactly what one would expect from a creep. And delusion keeps the world turning, probably always has. But these simps trying to feign an intelligent defense for exploitation and willful self destruction is super lame.
- Hunter Biden came up with a plan to unionize prostitutes for their protection after “telling strippers for 25 years that they should unionize,” according to texts found on his alleged laptop. -
Yep! It’s self-evident who is in support of this issues - the clientele! It ain’t honest moral fathers of daughters voraciously supporting the ‘sex industry’. I digress, but the same goes for the open air fentynil and tranq markets…someone out there is happily paying for $15 gum jobs from homeless addicts and they dont want their good time spoiled no matter what damage.
The term "sex worker" is coined by the lobby so they can exploit women better. Being penetrated by men is not a service one provides. This is not a job, because there are not promotions and the older you get the worse it gets for your "business".
Women in prostitution suffer a great deal of illnesses, both physical and mental ones, including alcohol and drug addictions to numb themselves from their sordid reality. Pimps and johns are not abusers and that leaves a toll on these women.
Besides, even if some of these women were true, real "volunteers" for "the job", the "offer" does not match the demand at all so women get trafficked to reach the numbers the industry needs. All the talk about "work" around this issue is just a way of whitewashing the exploitation of women by men.
Sex trafficking is a whole industry unto itself and is growing at an alarming rate. Sex work, like strip dancing, is a choice made by people who are of legal age. If employers were required to pay payroll and employment taxes, like every other business, sex workers would have disability insurance, FMLA protection, medicare and social security. 🙄 No brainer as I can see it. It would also force shady business practices and people into the sunlight. Sexual harassment protections would be very challenging though.
I do have real trouble buying into euphemisms like sex workers. Generally they wheel out the most articulate and level headed of these folks for these types of moments but it remains that this is a sordid business (created by the demand side) and most of the poor souls caught up in this are not there by choice. Yes, protect them and their rights wherever possible but "sex workers?" I guess is has a better ring to it then "abused, drug addicted and trafficked young girls and women."
Many countries in Europe offer free medical and pension to workers in the sex trade. Possibly the oldest business in the world.
Care and health keeps everyone safe.
The medical benefits argument pays for itself on the public health side alone. that is not my point. My point is that this a sordid business and eupenisms like "sex workers" and "the oldest business" hide the fact that women are often being abused or trafficked, health care or not. It also takes the heat off of the demand side of the business which is what I find most reprehensible. Call me a prude but I have real problems with the clientele of this business.
They are able to be abused and trafficked precisely because of prude attitudes like yours. In other countries sex work is treated just like other work. There it is no more sordid than working at a slaughterhouse or a factory farm. Less, IMO.
I've had first hand experience and it's true that it's the illegality and stigma that drives it underground with sordid results.
BS. In the countries that it is regulated it is hell for women. You're just making that up to pretend you know about the issue.
And you are more knowledgable and believable because why?
My experience is second hand but from VERY close family and their coworkers working in 4 different West/Central EU countries.
That is not true. There is nothing "prude" in trying to get these women a better life. They are trafficked because of the demand of men like you. They are trafficked because women DON'T WANT that life for them and the only way to make them do it is by extorsion, abuse and harassment.
Sordid is engaging with pimps and johns, who are the scum of the earth. It's not about sex, but about power. Pimps and johns love the idea of a powerless woman who has to do as they say. New Zealand, Germany and other countries were prostitution is regulated are hell for prostituted women. Only the poorest and most vulnerable are exploited there too. NO WOMAN wants to do that.
prude
proo͞d
noun
One who is excessively concerned with being or appearing to be proper, modest, or righteous.
You have decided that the workers in this video need a "better" life. You deciding what is a "better" life is the definition of prude. You're welcome.
I have personal, very close friendships with people who have worked in the sex trade in Germany, the Netherlands, Switzerland, Austria and a couple of other countries. Their experience is exactly NOT what you are saying. The opposite is true. By having the work legalized and regulated they were (no longer in the trade) protected - and well paid.
You mistake/conflate our concern for the wellbeing of these women with a "modest" or "righteous" (aka religious) attitude. That is not the case at all.
Sex work (at the risk of offending sensitive commenters) in Nevada can be legal employees, with great pay and safe, stable workplaces.
Kind of like what happened to other “sordid” industries like weed.
Less sordid than sitting in a phone bank trying to sell people fake car warranties.
Totally. Do you want your daughters to become sex workers when they grow up? The work is in high demand and it is just like any other work.
What are some of those countries?
Is "sex work" a vocation that we, as a society, should seek to valorize or perpetuate? Is it not degrading, regardless of a broader stigma?
The Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, to name the ones I know the best.
IMO no work that is done because you want to do it is degrading. I know that in the countries I mention (I know others but not well enough to feel I can make an informed statement) that exotic dancers, strippers and prostitutes can make really good money without physical danger or risk of disease.
It is almost literally the same job as actors in Hollywood. You get up on stage or have a 1 on 1 and pretend to be someone else for money. How far you want to go depends on you** SAG is the reason Hollywood actors are no exploited more than they are. Strippers in LA should have the same rights (as well as dancers and prostitutes).
** only by having legal rights and organizing can this statement be enforced. Adult actors don't "wing it" on camera. They have contracts that say EXACTLY what will be done, just like Brad Pitt in his movies.
To clarify, we're primarily talking about prostitution, not stripping or pornstars. In most countries, strip clubs and porn productions are already legal. While I think that abuse of prostitutes or strippers should be treated the same as any other crimes under the law, I'm undecided on the idea of legalising prostitution. I don't have a negative perception of prostitutes, but don't think that it's a desirable situation for women and wouldn't shed a tear if it were to disappear tomorrow.
While legalising prostitution may have some benefits in terms of health and safety, these may be transitory as Germany and the Netherlands indicate.
How many strippers, pornstars and prostitutes do you honestly believe "want to do it", as opposed to resorting to these trades as a last resort, or a result of coercion? It beggars belief that you would think that the majority of women in these professions "want to do it". Getting naked for the pleasure of a stranger, grinding on a stranger or getting f*cked by a stranger is almost definitionally degrading, as the woman is subordinated to the desires of a random who throws a few dollars their way.
Lastly, regardless the status of prostitution or strip clubs, abuses still occur and diseases are still very much at issue. You said you had knowledge of the regimes and conditions in those countries you mentioned, but I wonder what you've been reading. In additional the excerpts below, you should also look at: "legalization of prostitution is a violation of human rights" (https://www.nlg.org/nlg-review/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/11/NLGRev-68-2-Final.pdf).
In Germany: "In 2017, following lobbying from feminists and testimony from police officers about the rising levels of criminality and violence under the legal regime, the government introduced a number of restrictions: pimps were no longer allowed to dictate which “services” the women should provide to punters; brothel owners had to apply for a licence; and punters were mandated to use condoms.
“Of course, there was no way of enforcing these regulations,” Angie*, a German sex trade survivor tells me. “Pimps are criminals who just want to make money, and [punters] can’t be made to put on a condom. We still had to do what we were told.”"
"One man said: “There was one [pimp] who really beat up one of his women. With the fist two or three times in the face and thrown her against the wall.” Another reported: “When the women didn’t pay the pimp enough, they had their fingernails pulled off, or they beat the women to a pulp. The women were scared and never said anything.”
The sex buyers showed little to no empathy towards the women. “It’s like having a cup of coffee, when you’re done you throw it out,” said one. “It’s like renting an organ for 10 minutes,” said another."
https://unherd.com/2022/11/germany-europes-bordello/
-----------------------------
"When the Pussy Club opened near Stuttgart in 2009, the management advertised the club as follows: 'Sex with all women as long as you want, as often as you want and the way you want. Sex. Anal sex. Oral sex without a condom. Three-ways. Group sex. Gang bangs.' The price: 70 euros during the day" (Der Spiegel archived page to avoid ads: https://archive.ph/RgDZ7)
--------------------------
In Netherlands:
"When the Dutch government legalized prostitution in 2000, it was purportedly to protect sex workers by giving them work permits.[5] However, authorities now fear that this business is out of control: “We’ve realized this is no longer about small-scale entrepreneurs, but those big crime organizations are involved here in trafficking women, drugs, killings, and other criminal activities,” said Job Cohen, the former mayor of Amsterdam.[6] Over the years, officials have noticed an increase in violence centered on this irregular industry, and have blamed this increase on the illegal immigration of individuals into Amsterdam to participate in the sex industry.[7] . . .
In 2017, it was estimated by the Dutch National Rapporteur on Trafficking in Human Beings and Sexual Violence against Children that more than 6,000 people in the Netherlands fall victim to human trafficking each year.[9] Two thirds of the people trafficked, about 4,000 people per year, fall victim to sexual slavery and abuse.[10] In 2016, the mayor of Amsterdam admitted, for the first time, that the Dutch experiment to curb abuse by legalizing prostitution had failed miserably."
https://www.msuilr.org/new-blog/2022/7/25/the-failure-and-proposed-revision-of-legalized-prostitution-in-the-netherlands
--------------------------
"Abuses like forced prostitution, underage prostitution and unsafe working conditions still occur."
https://www.government.nl/topics/prostitution#:~:text=Prostitution%20is%20legal%20in%20the,unsafe%20working%20conditions%20still%20occur.
-------------------------
Agreed. The only reason a man -- and let's also be honest and admit that 99.99999% of the clients of sex workers are male -- is because he's too lazy and disgusting to have a relationship with a real woman. The ability to abuse woman is ALL of the appeal of going to a sex worker. He gets off on humiliating another human.
1. You're very empathetic towards men who are not attractive enough to get sexual release through a non-paying relationship.
2. The appeal of going to a sex worker is to get sexual release.
1. There is no such thing. Any man can find a woman if he takes a bath and brushes his teeth every day. She might not be a supermodel — and all men think the world owes them supermodels — but she will be human company.
2. Nobody ever died from lack of sex.
1. Yep, not very empathetic.
2. Yep, nobody ever did. (See 1 above.)
The usual emotional blackmail to get women agree with you doesn't work. How come women "not attractive enough" do not seek male prostitutes?
The idea that only akward men use women in prostitution is a myth. Many powerful or good looking men also use women in prostitution. It's about power, not sex.
Objectifying a human being is a horrible thing to do.
Sentence 1: I don't know what you're talking about.
S2: I thought there were male prostitutes that cater to women.
S3-4: I agree.
S5: Blanket statement. I do not think this is true. I think most men come during the interaction.
S6: I agree.
So i am the prude by another poster for arguing that men should treat women with respect and never abuse them? Funny its always worked for me with beneficial outcomes. i think I can live with the stigma but makes me very sad that so many feel differently.
You were likely labeled a "prude" by someone that doesn't have any
meaningful relationships with women.
Maybe the “prude” (haven’t seen that word in a while) comment was for your issue with the term sex worker. Abuse of anyone is horrible. And you certainly aren’t acting like a Karen, like Karen above.
I’m not convinced that properly regulated sex work can’t be a safe, functioning industry.
well i baited that by bringing the word into play myself. But i do not see how this industry does not turn into abuse one way or the other. One fair criticism I received is the use of the word being preferential to the actual "workers." My objection was that term being adopted by the wokerati to make this sound like something it isn't. But I certainly do not object to workers using that term to retain some dignity.
All true but for some women especially those who work in High Profile Escort Agency's usually are single mothers trying to make a living.
Women are abused in many homes everyday.
A LOT of women do chose to go into the business and I agree a lot shouldn't be there at all.
Unless men decide to keep their penis inside their pants nothing will change which is why it's important to have healthcare etc.
I am no expert but I am no dummy.
Your first point about High Profile = deadbeat Dads
2nd Abuse = asshole men
I don't buy the A LOT. and not to be critical but exactly how many women are in A LOT? (Sorry its the CEO in me, when a person told me we were going to sell A LOT, I immediately discounted what they said.)
There is a common theme that comes to your final point - men will always have sex drives. That is a healthy thing but they need to be focused on positive outcomes. That means a society that values women and does not objectify them as sex objects that can be purchased and/or abandoned and one that imbues responsibility in men for how they treat their partners and the results thereof. as a guy, it bothers me to no end how men have been allowed to abuse women and abandon their children. this is not civilized society if we allow that.
Very well put DMC. I often wonder how these women who think like JennyStokes would really feel if the circumstances were personalized. For example, one has an 18yr old son and he thinks he should spend his hard earned money on a prostitute who could possibly be part of a trafficking enterprise. Also, she claims that single mothers who work in high profile escort agencies are trying to make a living. How is sex work conducive to making a better life for your children? Would one want that child to grow up and be involved in that industry? I don’t understand the mindset of women who fail to consider that they may be encouraging the perpetuation of an industry that is destructive to families. I’ll stand proudly with you as a possible “prude”.
there is a lot to be said there. I try not to be judgmental of any individual. It is not anyway comparable as at least for my part I have been blessed, but nevertheless we have all taken jobs or tasks that really sucked in order to move forward. So, these people have my sympathy, but I reject the concept of normalizing, let alone glamorizing the business.
what mystifies me is that I have been basically called out for pointing out the source of the problem. the behavior of my fellow men. it bothers me to no end that the net beneficiaries of this is the scumbags and losers that use and abuse women and never take responsibility for a damn thing. It is one of the major civilizational problems we have at it why people who espouse classical liberal have found themselves politically homeless.
I suggest you look up Escort Agency's in you City's before you make a comment.
You are living in 'cloud cuckoo land.'
Society is not civilized never has been if it were we would not have murder/rape/schoolkids being shot/women being battered by their husbands etc.
i have never had the need or inclination to do so.
BTW Wolkenkuckkucksheim sounds better.
But basically you are saying society is effed up so deal with it. Guess I have still retained some optimism. Hoping the best for you too!
I do not, but in the back and forth nature of these chats I can see how I can step over my own points. Especially when it gets a bit edgy.
My default position on prostitution and drugs has basically been libertarian. The demand is there and someone will supply it. Legal or not. To the extent this can be done without any cost to society, so be it. However, I do think there is an attempt to downplay the costs of this approach and to normalize, and in some cases glamorize the business. I can abide the Vice but don't tell me its a Virtue.
I sense you may have read "Last Call" or similar literature about Prohibition because I take your point. the forces that came together at that point had valid concerns about the carnage that alcohol was inflicting on society (mostly women) but the solutions created a whole new set of problems that we are still dealing with (how come nobody ever mentions the income tax?)
bottom line the, shifting, point I am making is that I am having second thoughts on my libertarian position. With drugs, i think the benefits of legalization of have been oversold and the costs ignored. We have a serious addiction/homeless problem and we need to have more innovative solutions, (and this is a problem that hits me personally) It cannot be all carrots or all sticks. Prostitution is often linked to this issue and the main point to my argument here is to protect the, mostly women, and address the demand side so that women are protected both medically and physically. sadly , i do not have any perfect solutions.
That’s like posting a sympathetic BLM or Defund the Police sign in a toney white neighborhood where you don’t have to live with the consequences of your virtue signaling. Many of these girls are trafficked, or homeless or drug addicted. Like any cartel victims, they have to pay protection money to men who have total control over their lives. It is not a “profession “ and little girls don’t grow up thinking they want strange men fondling their bodies multiple times a night.
Giving them health insurance and union cards changes none of this. If you really care about these girls, give them an opportunity at the kind of life you have. How? It’s simple - arrest the Johns and publish their faces so their wives, families and co-workers can see them, and support organizations that attempt to help these (mostly) women live productive happy lives in the mainstream of our society.
Sex work may be “the oldest profession”, it’s also a profession that has been associated with slavery as long as it has existed, and is the one “profession” I can think of that has brought slavery on a massive scale with it into the marrow of 21st century modern societies.
Ha! How come they have to import impoverished women from Eastern Europe and Africa (etc.) who are basically entrapped? All sweetness and light, eh??
Following from Wikipedia- but most of us know this shit already!
[When the Dutch government legalized prostitution in 2000, it was to protect the women by giving them work permits, but authorities now fear that this business is out of control: "We've realized this is no longer about small-scale entrepreneurs, but those big crime organizations are involved here in trafficking women, drugs, killings, and other criminal activities", said Job Cohen, the former mayor of Amsterdam.[4]
More recently, officials have noticed an increase in violence centered on this irregular industry, and have blamed this increase on the illegal immigration of individuals into Amsterdam to participate in the sex industry: "The guys from Eastern Europe bring in young and frightened women; they threaten them and beat them", said a resident of De Wallen.[4] Prostitution has remained connected to criminal activities, which has led the authorities to take several measures, including detailed plans to help the prostitutes quit the sex trade and find other professions.[citation needed]]
There is a way to know. You can read the mountain of studies but of course you don’t care to know.
Yes you clearly know a tremendous amount about how social scientists approach vulnerable populations. It is clipboards all the way down.
Can you back up that comment with data?
“There no such thing s as a free lunch.” Free health care means taxpayer funded health care ... taxation is theft. Seriously. Not that I doubt her your point, but my point will always be “government funded anything is 98% bureaucratic waste”
Well we pay high taxes here and get none of that ‘MURICA!
Hello Lex. Obviously. We pay high taxes here in France but it's nice to know that everybody gets healthcare/schools/etc.
Countries in Europe often have public or mixed healthcare systems. Are those public pensions, or specifically for those in the sex trade? Are they paying taxes or making pension contributions? I'd be surprised if governments would incentivize sex work by providing special benefits to the industry.
Indeed, it is incorrect to call this a "victimless crime."
The "sex workers" themselves are the primary victims, but so are their "clients" who in the process degrade themselves as well. And society suffers as the "industry" demotes sex from a loving relationship to a commercial transaction.
Johns are “victims”? I don’t think so.
Victimless? I don’t think so.
The one in the black fishnets had a huge bruise on the left side of her face like she caught a big right hook. It might have been makeup. Another one had what looked like a painted-on bullet hole in her forehead. But by contrast, the bruise looked totally authentic.
Sad that they are advocating for remaining in this situation.
well said
I think we should take their word for it.
Marxist theory teaches you be both exploited and consent/benefit. This topic is probably too complicated to solve via chat room.
Don't sweat it. Our "society" long ago demoted almost every relationship to a "commercial transaction."
Not too judgmental
By definition the poor souls who have no choice are not workers but have been trafficked. They did try to make this distinction. The people who are unionizing are workers. I have no right to sit in judgement over their choices or their reasons.
I did not follow too much. too sad of a subject for me. i do think even those unionizing are likely in a grey area, at best, when it came to choices, but I cannot be sure of that.
Your basic approach of being morally neutral and non-judgmental is one that I have followed in the past. However, its hard not to look at the results of that approach and see we have lost something. I was really struck by a talk I saw about the homeless/addicts situation in SF by Michael Schellenberger where he came to the conclusion that based on what is happening it could no longer be said that we live in a civilized society. I think the same could be said about our approach to prostitution and its adjacencies.
As a former sex worker, I definitely prefer the term sex worker to prostitute or hooker. Prostitute is a word meant to degrade. No disrespect, but there’s a lot of us who prefer sex worker, whether we’ve been “trafficked” into the business or did it of our own volition. If you’ve never actually done the job, your opinion of the words we prefer doesn’t matter.
By the way, there are many other industries that people are trafficked into, fisheries for one. But they don’t get the headlines sex trafficking does because they don’t aren’t as salacious and don’t get as many clicks. In the twenty plus years I spent in the sex industry, the majority of the people I met doing the work were there because it pays 100x better than any other “square” job they could get. The girls that were “trafficked” had what used to be called a pimp, a man who pretends to be in love with a woman to get her to enter the industry and give him all her profits.
The mainstream media is lying about the human trafficking problem, in the same why they lie about everything else. All prostitution arrests are now labeled “human trafficking busts.” Look beyond the salacious headline and you’ll almost always see it’s just a bunch of men and women arrested for prostitution. Take a look at all the BS anti-trafficking “charities.” There’s one run by Cindy McCain that especially ridiculous that helps no one except the layers of useless bureaucrats who run it. The only help they offer women who want to leave the industry is body wash or a Panera gift card. Not a job that actually pays a living wage or affordable housing or childcare.
Read up on Tim Ballard. He’s the exact type of person you’d expect to find in an “anti-trafficking organization.” Doing more harm than good
https://www.sltrib.com/news/2023/12/06/new-court-filing-accuses-tim/
Your comment reads like contradictory nonsensical bullshit.
You state here:
“the majority of the people I met doing the work were there because it pays 100x better than any other “square” job they could get.”
This suggests it is a conscious, voluntary decision.
Then later you say:
“The only help they offer women who want to leave the industry is body wash or a Panera gift card. Not a job that actually pays a living wage or affordable housing or childcare.”
If they willingly enter sex work, why is it anyone else’s obligation, moral or otherwise, to get them out?
If that is true, why should anyone care about someone that discarded a “square” job because of greed and materialistic consumerism? You’re painting a picture of people that willingly enter an “industry” rife with violence, abuse, corruption and depravity simply to make “100 X more”.
You then go on to imply that all, not some, but “all prostitution arrests are now labeled “human trafficking busts.”” How do you know this? Do you have evidence to support this claim, or are you being hyperbolic for effect?
It seems like you’re saying trafficking is overstated because simple prostitution is now labeled trafficking regardless of whether or not it’s being forced or coerced.
And which “protective” laws are you talking about? Be specific.
And I’m not being hyperbolic when I say all regular prostitution busts are labeled trafficking.
Trafficking is rare, regular prostitution is very common and has been for centuries
Ok so if it isn’t anyone’s job to get them out, why are there so many non-profit organizations determined to do just that ?
There are numerous non-trafficking organizations that claim that is what they are trying to do, yet like so many NGO’s they help no one but the useless bureaucrats that run them.
“ Ok so if it isn’t anyone’s job to get them out,”
Idk who made that claim, but it wasn’t me.
Did you miss the part where I said “willingly”, as in not coerced, or of one’s own volition? It’s well known that this “industry” is full of violence and depravity- the industry thrives on it. So if one enters it willingly, simply because more money can be made, that’s where my sympathy ends. The same argument could be made for drugs. Should they all be made legal, particularly from a pure libertarian perspective? Absolutely. Would there be less violence if a black market system that had to operate outside of legal confines did not exist? Almost certainly. That, however, is not reality. If I give up my day job to sell drugs illegally in an industry and environment that I know is dangerous and violent, simply because I can make more money, that would make me an idiot, not a victim.
Victims are the ones forced into the industry and forced to stay there. You do yourself and *actual* victims zero favors by conflating victims with idiots. They are two very different circumstances. Someone that says “wow I can make 100x as much slinging ass as I can as an admin assistant or accountant or whatever” and enters that lifestyle willingly cannot and should not be compared with minors and women that are often times kidnapped, trafficked, etc into that life against their will.
This flawed, shallow, simplistic, binary train of thought is typical blathering nonsense from a bleeding heart that doesn’t have the intellectual acumen to engage in nuance, realize two things can be true simultaneously, and look at things for what they truly are. Good luck with that. Seems to be going swimmingly so far.
The “fault” of someone that enters an industry of dubious legality and chock full of atrocity, deliberately and willingly is their own- particularly if they do it for purposes of greed or materialism, and especially if other lower paying but safer and legal alternatives are available. This is the part where you attack my morality and make assumptions of what my demography and background and identity is. That’s what comes next, right? Go.
One point I made I need to clarify. I criticized the term sex worker as being applied by activists and people outside that profession. . If that is what people in that line of work prefer that is their right and prerogative. I did not mean to give imply that was wrong..
You implied the majority of people you ran into were in the business for better pay, but if you don't mind, what would you estimate is the ratio of sex workers pursuing the career of their own volition vs the workers you define as "trafficked"?
I’d say 80% of the women I met were there on their own volition. 20% had a pimp posing as a boyfriend. I’ve never met anyone who was kidnapped or forced into the work by a random stranger. That’s a rare occurrence and contrary to popular belief there is not a huge market for terrified women who don’t actually want to be there. Go read The Erotic Review. Most men who consider themselves “hobbyists,” (a gross term men who frequently use the services of sex workers have given themselves) want a woman who’s totally into it or can at least pretend to be for an hour or so.
Thanks Sherry, your perspective is really helpful.
If you’ll humor me one more question, what can be done from a legal sense to help the 20% of women who work at the behest of the pimp/boyfriend? I think we probably have different opinions regarding this issue, but I’m sure we agree that nobody should be coerced into sex work for any reason. As you see it, what can be done to help the minority of workers who are not involved of their own free will?
So, how many sex workers do you know? Or is everything you're saying based on pure speculation and/or media reports (which are going to be deeply biased due to the illegal nature of the business)?
Wake up.
What do you think happens when a Conference comes to Town, mostly men?
20 percent of the men call Escort agency's.
Escort Agency's are proper agency's often run by women. They build up a supposedly good clientele base but of course some of the clients they do not know.
One is supposed to Escort the lone man to dinner etc.
I have known many women (who also have jobs) do this work and it is NOT just escorting men to dinner.
All those people in Washington/congress people etc. Living away from homes???????
There are a huge amount of extremely good looking women some working as models where work is not always available so they do escort work on the side.
You can believe me or not I don't care.
Down the ladder it does become more complex because yes there are nefarious people who exploit women. Not a job for women without 'street smarts'.
IF you had free medical check-ups and mental care and made this job a profession most of these 'pimps' would not be around.
I remember walking down a street in Geneva and one woman said 'hello' to my husband. I told her 'sorry he's taken'. We both laughed.
Take away the mystique and the problem is mostly a lot better.
The Super Bowl is in Vegas next month. It will be the world championship of escort services, never seen before.
Sex Work is Work is just wokeified feminism. "Sex work" is woke NewSpeak for people today to pretend exploitation is "work", so idiots safely selling fantasies like "cam girls" and "working" on OnlyFans can try to retain some pretense of self worth while making money from other idiots willing to pay for it. Meanwhile, prostitutes in the lowest social class are hidden and forgotten. No amount of "unionizing" will save them. Sex trafficked victims have even less hope of ever being rescued and saved as their pimps and whatever organized crime syndicate that own them use "sex work" and related "protective" laws to serve as cover to get away with what they're doing.
Seriously, Matt, this is what you're spending time reporting on? The woke got to you now too by their ideas of "sex work"?
So true. So called “sex work”, be it strip clubs or prostitution, has been under mob control for ever. It’s part of destructive seedy underbelly of society. The women, girls and young men are indeed exploited and abused daily. Even if they do “unionize”, the union boss will likely be a pimp and will extort even more money and favors from them than the creep who owns the club.
If sex work is legal and regulated it will become like other jobs, just with a happy end. Prostitution is legal in many countries around the world, many in Europe where I've lived and worked for 30 years. Sure there is still exploitation and crime, but it is similar to other jobs where there is exploitation and crime, like construction, food delivery.
Legalizing it in America only makes it impossible for police to approach potential sex trafficking victims to be saved and rescued. Michael Shellenberger reported in detail on this in San Francisco.
https://public.substack.com/p/san-francisco-leaders-invite-sex
I don't actually believe everything is all fine and dandy in Europe, but I don't know enough about what goes on there to comment. But even if I take your word for it, laws are not one size fits all. Just because it works fine somewhere else doesn't mean it'd work fine here. Censorship and government suppression of free speech and free press works all fine in China too. So it'll work just fine here? Just legalize it?
Your first statement is factually incorrect. It is the equivalent of saying if we make construction work legal it makes it impossible for INF to check if workers are illegal immigrants.
I read the Shellenberger article till the paywall, and most of the study it is based on. Did you read the study? It very clearly says that liberalizing the legalization of prostitution in Germany in 2002 did NOT lead to an increase of human trafficking. What it did lead to, and the subject of this post by Racket News, is that all the people working in prostitution had legal protections, unemployment insurance, pensions, health insurance, and unionization - to name a few important points.
I also take great issue with the 150 countries included in the study list for the reason I gave in my comment from 4 January to your same comment. Including countries with a vastly different legal system and/or form of government, e.g. China, Pakistan, Thailand, Saudi Arabia will skew the results proportionally away from what results of legalization in the US would look like. Saudi Arabia is Muslim Kingdom. Does anyone think that comparing prostitution / human traficking in Saudi Arabia will provide useful insights for Nebraska?
I've downloaded the study and have started reading it. My prejudice is clear, but I'm trying to be as objective as possible.
Your comparison between EU and the US vs. US and China is flawed, IMO. US law and legal culture is extremely close to EU law and legal culture. Chinese law and legal culture, let alone social culture, is extremely different to the US. Thus a legal idea that works well in Europe has a much higher chance of success in the US than a legal idea from China. I've lived in multiple EU countries, traveled to most all and worked in most over the last 30 years. Legal prostitution is a non-issue in West/Central Europe in my experience, but I must admit that this comes almost exclusively from 2nd hand knowledge and discussions, not from me making empirical studies.
If something is "legalized" (presumably another tax scam) in Europe.....I"m all in for it!!!!
Germany, where it is "regulated" is hell for women in prostitution. Only the poorest, migrant, helpless end up there, desperate and/or coerced, even if it's now "legal". Sweden and France criminalise pimps and johns, so it's good for the women. It is not "similar" to other jobs at all in any European countries. You're making that up.
I'm most definitely not making it up. I know people directly who have worked in the business in multiple countries. Poor, migrant and helpless people are exploited in all countries. Keeping the poor, migrant and helpless from organizing their labor only assures that they will continue to be exploited.
Prostitution is akin to slavery, not labour. It's exploitation. Helping the poor, migrant and helpless from being exploited is the goal, and that means helping them getting out of the slavery/prostitution system. Regulation only benefits pimps and johns.
That is simply not true. Trafficking is akin to slavery, and it should be stopped. Prostitution is not slavery any more than picking tomatoes is slavery. The existence of human trafficking and forced labor in both industries is not a reason to bar the laborers in those industries from organizing their labor.
The issue here is not even prostitution. It is stripping. The women in the video are all in the industry voluntarily. They have a right to organize their labor in the US.
From what I have read there are many young women brought in from Thailand and Eastern Europe for this trade.
"Fucking and sucking for a living is exactly like DoorDash!"
-Statement made by the utterly deranged.
Interesting quote. Who wrote that?
Oh some creepy sexpat in Europe who has been crawling up and down this thread defending degenerate lifestyles.
Name? I can't find that quote.
The mob definitely stopped controlling prostitution a long time ago. Once girls could
post their own ads on the internet that became a thing of the past. But go off king for sure you know more than I do
I worked in the sex industry for many years as an independent Dominatrix. SESTA and FOSTA were passed in 2018 so I don’t understand why these girls are bringing that up now. One of the worst results of those laws was the closure of Backpage.com (Kamala Harris mainly behind this at the time). Everyone booked sessions from backpage ads so that was a huge blow.
Sex workers are supposed to be flexible and adapt. If all you judgmental people don’t like “sex worker” then whore, hoe, girl, whatever you prefer. It doesn’t matter, the profession is going nowhere and is fueled 90% by married men.
As for the strippers, they may be bringing a mindset that may undermine them in the end.
agree I have made the point above (or below.) Dare I say how many of these "workers" are flowing in over the border every day with no one to protect them at all? I hope there is a special place in hell for all of the people who have made this possible.
How would we protect them?
Ultimately, its on the demand side. And we have a long long way to go. But i do want to make clear that i put no cuplability on the providers. they are the innocent
Looking at the demand side is definitely a smart approach. Same consideration would be helpful in dealing with abuse of drugs, abortion, and undocumented workers, which we’ve proved cannot be limited by bans on supply.
yeah what bothers me in this case the suppliers are prosecuted and the demanders get their hands slapped. versus the drugs et al, the individual suppliers are very limited in their offering.
Being a cam girl showing your face is definitely going to lower your chances of becoming an excecutive at H&M. Other than that, what the hell do you care if a girl or guy makes money showing their junk to people willing to pay for it? It has ZERO affect on what you do with your money.
Idiots spend their money on things all the time. Lots of things I find idiotic.
This is a labor issue. These are workers trying to organize. More power to them.
You totally miss my point.
If your focus is the "workers" in the video and not prostitutes in the lowest strata of society who are selling their bodies because they have no other choice or sex trafficked victims, then you are missing my point.
Interesting you're so concerned about them but not a single peep from you about prostitutes who actually need help. And yes, sex trafficked victims do in fact need to be saved. If you think they don't, then I have nothing more to say to you as your moral compass is too far off the chart.
You're commenting on the wrong video then. Not my error, it is yours.
I get your point. I just completely disagree with you and your point of view. You use the word "save" multiple times in your comment. Those workers in the video don't need or want to be saved. They just want to organize so they can stop being exploited. Pretty simple.
Woke and feminism are antagonistic. Feminists work for the abolition of prostitution (not "criminalisation"; check out the "Nordic Model" to see what I mean).
Woke are a Trojan Horse in this matter as they are in many others. They pretend they care while all they do is making things worse for everyone else.
There is in fact a brand of woke feminism that is not feminism as you understand it. In left wing space it is called liberal feminism, which pushes woke ideas like "intersectional feminism", "choice feminism" (a concept where a tiny group of privileged women who can afford luxury belief of "Sex Work is Work" to capitalize of making money in the safety of their own homes behind cameras while pushing for laws and "rights" that validate themselves but will lead to detriment of prostitutes walking the streets under control of pimps and mobs), and first world problems like "micro-aggression", as well as "Believe All Women!" even if it means never looking into whether the allegations are false, unless it's the wrong kind of women, like Jewish women brutally raped and killed by terrorists, or maybe Republican women. Then suddenly they don't "Believe All Women" anymore. They just go radio silent. "Toxic masculinity" may fall under the purview of this brand of woke feminism too. None of it has much to do with actually advocating for women or women's basic human rights and equality.
I know what the Nordic model is. It is not part of this brand of woke liberal feminism.
good points and I run the risk of opining on something I am not sully versed in (but what are these boards for? lol) but when ever someone throws a model based on Scandinavia I immediately discount. Not because it does not work for them as it likely does and probably is something i would agree with. the problem is you are dealing with a high trust homogenous society. it is easier to enact these types of policies and those defying them are isolated. I would love things to be that way here but they arent and the change required is centuries away.
But.....Sweden's experiment with mass immigration rom a different culture may be a great test for my theory.
It's not based on anything cultural. The Nordic model is called that way because it was first implemented in Sweden. That's it. Nothing to do with the rest of policies they might have there. What they implemented was criminalising pimps and johns, not the women, who are helped to exit prostitution. It's called "model" because the idea is to take it as a template for other countries when establishing policies about prostituted women, as opposed to "regulation", which is a Trojan Horse against the women, in favour of pimps and johns.
not based on the culture but the culture is why it works - I would all be all for it by the way but I doubt yo could implement it.
Sex work as a phrase has been around for decades before 'wokeism' or whatever other hyped term you'd like to use to show us your total ignorance about the actual facts that Matt presents.
Sure, let's play word games and argue about semantics, a favorite pass time of the woke. This way we can all remain blindly ignorant of the vast majority of people, mostly poverty-stricken women, drug addicts, and minors, who are being harmed and exploited as prostitutes, but will become even more invisible while everyone pretends their problems are solved and their lives are improved because they're now just doing "work" and there'll be "unions" and "labor rights" for them. Shall we play pronoun games next?
funnny part I remember the late 70's when the feminist movement was going after 7-11 for selling Playboy and Penthouse. boy have they moved on.
Excellent post.
Prostitution should be legalized and workers should be protected. Workers should be offered options out of that lifestyle as well
All jokes aside, I wish these people well in their efforts to organize and to fight laws that endanger their lives and their livelihoods. BTW, I have a friend who does this for a living (she's a fetish model), so I understand what's at stake. My Dad was a fanatic about unions, so that also makes me sympathetic.
Well then, let’s have a union for thieves, for the homeless, for Hamas soldiers... After all, they’re just “workers trying to organize “.
Maybe they can join "Local 12-Villains, Thieves and Scoundrels union" ?
There may be a brawl over who gets to “manage” their pension fund.
Thieves, homeless, Hamas soldiers. Not terms I typically find related with “workers.”
Sea Sentry is an idiot. Pay him no heed.
Many thieves consider themselves as sort of entrepreneurs, and Hamas soldiers certainly consider themselves gainfully employed and are paid. Some homeless people work, some don't, but many have a routine that they consider their daily chores. I think you get my point. Unionization doesn't change behaviors, it just institutionalizes them and adds another layer of fees the girls have to pay (in the case of prostitution). Health checks, on the other hand, are a no brainer and should be encouraged regardless of any activity's legal status.
Perhaps a union for professional social media commenters, colloquially referred to as "trolls?" The hookers of the internet? World Wide Web Whores unite! And organize!
F*ck you.
Sea Sentry is an idiot. I already blocked him, which is what I do with idiots who make idiotic replies to my post, so he won't read this, but I just wanted to let others know.
From where I’m standing, it’s quite the opposite. Your “I’m right because of my epistemic isolation, and anyone who disagrees is an idiot” ain’t ever going to win over any real thinkers. I wouldn’t be surprised though if you are the smartest person your fetish model friend knows, you might have that going for you…
And never use the word "ain't" again.
And go f*ck yourself.
I never said "anyone who disagrees is an idiot." I just though Sea Sentry made an idiotic remark.
BTW, NotEnoughTime got blocked too for trying to defend an idiotic position.
I'm an American living in Austria for 30 years. When I first arrived here in the 90s and had to get my work permit updated often, I would spend quite some time waiting (pre-internet days!) at the local government office. For a period of time, the office where I waited was down the hall from where sex workers (prostitution is legal in Austria) would have to go VERY regularly to prove they were disease-free and get their cards stamped so they could go to work. I would listen to the girls chat about the clubs where they worked; which clubs were good, which were bad. Which managers were creeps or assholes and who was cool.
To my young, fresh-from-the-US male mind this was salacious at first. After only a few minutes it was mundane. It was like any other workers discussing their jobs. That is exactly the point. Sex work is just like any other work, if you take out puritanical prejudices. "My body my choice" applies here just like with abortion. If a woman or man wants to sell their body - willingly and being of legal age - it is no one's business but theirs. Sex workers should have the same workers' rights just like people making potato chips or Teslas.
Denying sex workers rights makes the possibility for exploitation and crime MUCH higher.
European here........totally agree.
Nailed it.
Your last sentence is spot on. Doesn’t justify going to one ... morally, ethically, socially, etc. But criminalizing the behavior merely makes “targeted enforcement” (against your enemies) possible
I don't know what you mean "justify." I knew a guy for many years who was a high paid executive for a large 3 letter US firm. He wanted sex but not a relationship (long story). So he went to a brothel regularly. He was very satisfied and the girls made great money.
Just noting that if it’s legal (probably should be) it does not automatically make it “justifiable.” People answer to all sorts of other people ... parents, spouses, kids, colleagues, etc. Crossing that line may cause tremendous chaos ... and that may suck so much as to make crossing the line unjustifiable
Definitely agree. My wife and I both agree that prostitution being legal (here in Austria) is a good thing, and believe legalization and tough regulation is better than it being illegal - note I haven't read the study linked above yet that may change my mind.
All that being said, despite what my wife says, I really doubt she'd be OK with me going to see a prostitute "just for sex." To the point that I wouldn't think about risking the "tremendous chaos" even if I felt that our sex life was unsatisfactory (which is fortunately not at all the case). So I agree with you there fully.
For (particularly) young men with no partner, I think going to a prostitute is a really good solution.
I’ve not been to a strip club since college. After watching some of these “topless entertainers” there’s a 100% chance I’ll never darken the door of one ever again. My god.....Is there a way to unsee any of this?
Love the little tune played by Tom Morello where he references well documented communist Cesar Chavez……ya just can’t fix stupid folx.
Earlier in life I was dragged to a few "gentlemen's clubs" on business junkets. My diversion was to see if I could find a girl without a tatoo.
Bored to death surrounded by naked women was never a predicament I expected to find myself in.
It's never what the 15-year-old boy fantasized it would be, is it?
There’s nothing like a well documented communist to start the day.
But were you referring to well documented Cezar Chavez, the leader of the agriculture workers strike in the 60’s, or well documented Hugo Chavez, of Venezuela? And why do you think Morello is stupid for referencing whichever one you’re referring to?
Survey says a large majority of straight men might disagree. They enjoy looking at the female body.
You might want to watch that video again & get some glasses. I'm as straight as they come and enjoy looking at beautiful woman as much as the next guy, but have no desire to see any of these women naked. But hey....you do you.....
The first, best step to better, and safer working conditions is to legalize all consensual activity, period full stop. The issues of abuse, by both customers and handlers is because of the dynamic of prohibition. This is on top of the invasions of privacy and the opportunities for police corruption that are endemic to an outlawed trade.
If you are morally queasy about this business, I get it. However, the answer is to use moral suasion to encourage these people to follow a different path, not to outlaw consensual behavior because you don't like the choices people make. That path always causes more problems than it solves.
that is the libertarian argument and it does make some sense. Where it falls off is where you refer to "moral suasion." It never happens. Once "legal" it becomes "moral." Same has happened to marijuana legalization, (which i supported.) I see none of the benefits i anticipated, just a bunch of perpetually stoned (and smelly) people and cities that smell like skunk.
we are dealing with civilizational decline here and could use some "moral suasion" but anyone who makes that argument is ridiculed as a prude by people to lazy too get off the couch, get in shape, and get a decent job that will allow you to find a suitable partner that will give you the sex life, and more, that will give you real satisfaction.
Sorry for the rant.
No need to apologize, we all need to rant now and then. 😊 That said, it is a statist trap; I think to conflate legal with moral. That is the basis for all manner of policies that strip people of moral agency and denudes their rights. If we keep government to protecting people’s persons and property, then we have a better chance of escaping this trap. Peace.
the problem is i agree with you!! Which leaves us in a quandry. the state does conflate the moral with the legal and i do not trust the government to content itself with just protecting people's god-given rights and property. They won the war with God and now see themselves as the only moral authority
At least not a quandary between us, since we agree! We just both need to fight the good fight in limiting the power of the state and point out to the world that it is a competing worship center and encouraging others to a better, more peaceful path.
... I'm sorry are you saying that the situation is now worse in states that legalized weed than it was before legalization/medicalization??
As a Coloradan who fled at the start of the Californian Invasion and have watched from afar as my home state rotted, let me answer this for you:
HELL YES
I've had family living in the suburbs around Denver for 20 years now (we're MT people)
if weed legalization has made the place significantly worse, I fail to see how
It's still nice there when I visit, and call me an idealist, but I think it's nice knowing nobody is in prison or jail over weed and that I'm not gonna get arrested for a vape pen or a couple bowls in a baggy or things like that which we used to worry about
I have relatives in CO, NV, TX, FL, NC. Colorado and Nevada are
great (x-the recent CO Supreme Court/Trump nonsense). There are moralizers everywhere who will always be anti-weed. There will be plenty of anti-beer, anti-interracial dating, anti-gay people around as well. They will naturally see more “this place has gone to shit” things in states that disagree with them on weed, abortion, name the issue.
NYer here. Have nothing against weed (except how stupid and checked out it makes many people!) But since we legalized it here- the stench has become so prevalent- on streets, in CVS, in the Metropolitan Museum of Art!!! Ferchrissakes! Is nowhere safe from the skunk smell?
I left in the early 90s. Each visit home things were worse until I stopped returning.
It's true, we do all collectively pine for the halcyon days of America in the 1990s
What kind of things got worse in Co, if you don't mind talking about it?
As someone who has lived here off and on since '90, I can say that I do not encounter weed on a regular basis in public any more than before. Many people use at home, use edibles, whatever, but in public it is similar to what I smelt previously.
What has changed is that the drastic increase in homelessness, especially working families, as the cost of living has sky rocketed over the past 10 years. Also a massive increase in the chronically homeless population which takes over previously lovely urban parks and trails. Many of these people probably initially came for the legal weed, but not anymore. Cost living has gone sky high ($2500 a month of a decent 2 bedroom apartment, not a great one) and wages have not kept pace, which leads to more crime, more homelessness, and less safety.
Schools are chronically underfunded becuase the weed money allocated to them means the general assembly spends an equivalent amount elsewhere. And all of our property taxes just doubled because cost of living has increased the residential valuations. Further emiserating the local population.
I miss being a purple state. I miss when our politicians had to actually compromise. One party rule always leads to ideological garbage solutions.
Is that true about the GA reallocating spending away from schools because they think legal weed is covering their part?
Do you have any writing or reporting about that? That's nuts.
https://coloradosun.com/2019/06/12/where-does-colorados-marijuana-tax-money-go/
Here... the lion's share goes to the Health Services Budget...
https://www.cde.state.co.us/communications/2021marijuanarevenue - Mostly the school share goes to construction, which is important as our state's population explodes.
I do not have reporting handy for it. I volunteer on a board within my school district, and it is something we have discussed, especially recently with the property tax increases. I am working with my state Senator and Representative to make sure it doesn't happen this time, as most of our property taxes go to the school districts. Maybe I can dig up some older reporting.
Yes.
I do not have any standard of comparison. The only states i have been spent a lot of time in have legalized. My point was that the benefits that I, as a supporter, anticipated were not realized. (please spare me the statistics. If there has been a revenue windfall, the govs promptly wasted it.)
The windfall is buying and consuming weed without risking arrest. If there is another benefit, it’s just gravy.
yeah not a big fan so thats a benefit lost on me. to each their own though. I just wish it did not smell so bad.
PS I grew up in a the 70's when everyone smoked. I did not realize how bad things smelled until I was in college in the 80's and everyone stopped.
... so it's worse than when people were going to federal prison and shit over weed?
Please, and i said I was for it, but if you go to that angle, you do know that those are often plea deals from more serious crimes?
Look I know people are touchy about this. My attitude is generally libertarian. I see the case for recreational use, same as and likely less dangerous than alcohol, and have no problem with that. (I do wish people would not stink up the joint and would notice how bad they smell but that's my preference. i feel the same way about tobacco.) But my main point is with regard to MJ was the benefits were oversold/and the down side undersold. It was part of a point about conflating the moral with the legal but we are WAY down the rabbit hole from there!! lol
I'm not saying the commercialization was the right thing. But it's apparently what some political thinkers felt had to happen to get the right thing (ie, an end to marijuana prohibition) done. It's interesting to think about why that is. Were they afraid that if every weed shop didn't look like a Starbucks, legalization would turn into like the Whiskey Rebellion again? Fuck if I know lol
I agree. The government shouldn’t have to subsidize this work though. They should neither subsidize or penalize imo.
Completely agree.
Without sex workers what will happen ?
Thank you
If we gave each and every person between the ages of 10-13 a brand new exotic sports car, you could expect that gift to be treated a lot of different ways. Some people would fire it up and use it before they were old enough to see over the steering wheel. Some people might skip the maintenance schedule. Some people would take it off-roading. Some people might rent it out to any old person willing pay the going fee. Some people might have their keys taken and have their car abused/monetized by others. Certainly a few people would build a shrine around it and hardly let themselves acknowledge they own something so nice.
It’s an imperfect analogy, but I see human sexuality like that. It’s a priceless gift to the recipient, but it will only stay nice as long as you use it in a mature, responsible way. Conversely it can become an idol to be worshipped instead of a gift to be enjoyed. In other words, don’t feed your pearls to pigs, but don’t spend your whole life clutching them either.
It’s not like this in much of the developing world, but many people who choose sex work as a vocation in the US could make perfectly fine money working a normal job. Certainly the people who are smart enough to organize labor movements could leverage that intelligence into meaningful careers. If people want to monetize their naughty bits with other consenting adults, that’s their choice, it’s a free country, blah blah blah… but they should own the consequences, and there will always be consequences with this kind of work. The myth is that we can take away those consequences with a few new laws. Pass whatever law you want, people who sell what is precious will have forever lost that which is precious.
Bravo, well thought out and spoken!
Yes: “ It’s a priceless gift to the recipient, but it will only stay nice as long as you use it in a mature, responsible way. Conversely it can become an idol to be worshipped instead of a gift to be enjoyed.”
I hate to be crude about it, but Sex Worker most often translates to no positive father figure growing up.
Which has nothing to do with their right to organize, get fair wages and stop wage theft.
And possibly one involved in a very wrong way.
"unionize for better wages, safer working conditions, and against allegedly discriminatory hiring practices"
1. unionize for better wages - isn't this dictated by demand?
2. safer working conditions - define safe, and then explain why the Gov needs to provide that.
3. allegedly discriminatory hiring practices - see point #1.
Clown World.
1. No. I think you mean supply and demand. Strip clubs are not the Wild West, there are wages and tips, and clubs do their best to stiff workers on wages as well as dip into their tips. You ever been to a strip club with a 40 dollar cover? How much would you even have left over to tip the dancers?
2. Ideally safe would mean "don't have to worry about getting beat up or killed in or around the workplace." You know why OSHA standards exist? It's the same here.
3. I don't really see the connection. Do you think the poorest paid workers are blissfully unaffected by unfair hiring practices or something? Or are you thinking like "well pussy's pussy, why would anyone discriminate?"
You are assuming that all parties involved in sex work are of high ethical and moral character. Seriously? I also do mean "demand" only. Who wants sex from a sex worker? What does that psychological profile look like? I have some ideas, but it's kind of a tangent so I leave that to you to consider for yourself.
This whole story reminds me of the old adage "No honor among thieves" or "Sleep with dogs, don't be surprised you get fleas" (something like that), and I am no Puritan. :)
I don't think I have to assume anything about the personal or moral character of the workers or bosses to have an opinion on this
Although it may be true my opinion about how these disputes play out may be colored by conclusions I have drawn about management and labor from my many years in the workforce
I assume anybody who likes pussy (or oral sex or dick or ass, or whatever tbh) - but hates going on dates - is a potential patron of prostitutes. I don't feel the need to Mindhunter this stuff it's pretty straightforward
As for the rest, I myself have gone to strip clubs a bunch of times. In my opinion it's way better (read: more fun, less weird) in cities where workers have fought to influence the laws to make them less weird and puritanical, and where government and management have listened
I simply don't like Government getting involved in every facet of society. You invite them in to regulate and all of a sudden a new set of laws are introduced that nobody asked for. Be careful.
Yeah, like laws to ensure safe mines, or airplanes that don’t crash, dumb government involvement like that?
Yeah, laws nobody asked for... nice try, troll somewhere else.
The only thing that will ever help American workers and by extension everyone outside the ruling classes and the officer classes is strong ethical trade unions. Eight years of obomber and no "Employee Free choice act". Three years of Biden and no Pro act. There's a reason the the ruling classes hate unions. They want "arbitrary power" and, of course more of the wealth. From fascist dictatorship to communist regimes, they're all the same. Not your friends. They own the organs of propaganda and convince you through the indocrination industrial complexes that unions are bad and "freedom" is good. Employment at will! Ultimately they want you at the "natural wages", just enough to keep you alive and producing wealth for THEM!
Unions do little for most workers. The private sector has to compete for the same workers and obviously (92% to 8% outside of government) does a better job. Unions are a 19th century story that have outlived their usefulness. They have devolved into an often corrupt political cartel that seeks to expand the power of union bosses. Want a less flexible, competitive and productive economy, with another layer of overlords? Vote union.
( I wroe above but applies to your comment, so i copied). as a senior executive i have to give at least one shout out for unions from my (management) perspective. that would be the unions that represent the trades. They offer apprenticeships training etc. they are easy to deal with. Is there BS/ yes. but there is always BS. Are they a bit more expensive? Yes but I am willing to bet on the quality, productivity, and efficiency advantage. The only job actions i ever saw was when some a hole was trying to work around them. They created value and delivered value and it was a good relationship and the workers were compensate fairly.
Public unions on the other hand are a cancer and the majors like UAW lost their way a long time ago.
Fair comments. With exceptions, the trade unions do a much better job of what unions can do that is productive. They’re more expensive as you say, which is why I’m in favor of right to work states where government contracts can be awarded based on overall value. In our state (California) prevailing wage rules apply. For all intents and purposes that means union labor. Here’s how it works here: unions fund political campaigns, elected officials award those unions lucrative contracts that are multiples of non-union companies. Rinse and repeat. Look at the amount of money the teachers unions, the SEIU and the prison guards unions spend on elections. Your accurate comments notwithstanding, this is a corrupt practice that taxpayers foot the bill for.
Oh I agree with you. as my post said the public unions like SEIU are a cancer and should be dissolved yesterday. the trades generally do not play those games. (Not as familiar with CA but doing a huge job in LA right now with no problems.) the prevailing wage may hold in those cases but they arent job killers. these are skilled guys making middle class wages which is a good thing.
ITs one of my bitches about the executive suite. Saving money for the sake of saving money and not assessing value. One of my favorite sayings (and its mine TM) is "most of the major screw ups I have seen in business started with someone trying to save a little money."
That's so true - I couldn't agree more. In our area we have thousands of immigrants (yes, mostly illegal) who work in the trades. While not as skilled, they will work for a fraction of a union wage. I wouldn't want them doing my engineering work, but for things like drywall, masonry, painting, etc. they do fine work. Of course, if we had some control over immigration on our southern border, "prevailing wages" would just be "wages" and American workers would benefit overall. I'd be fine with paying the higher price in that case. But I guess the people in Washington like a steady flow of unskilled labor to serve as their maids and gardeners. I'm surprised the unions don't push back more against open borders.
one of the many reasons the unions lost their credibility. they threw the american laborer under the bus to please Washington. But look how much housing prices went down due to savings from immigrant labor......oh wait.
19th century? The National Labor Relations Act passed in the 1930s. And the Jimmy Hoffa phase is well past.
There were labor unions before the civil war, but they began in earnest in the 1880's with the Knights of Labor and the American Federation of Labor (remember the name Samuel Gompers?). As for the end of the "Jimmy Hoffa" phase, would that that were true https://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/22/nyregion/6-year-sentence-for-melissa-g-king-who-stole-millions-from-sandhog-union.html , https://www.illinoispolicy.org/former-afscme-boss-admits-to-embezzling-200000-in-union-dues/ , https://www.freep.com/story/money/cars/2018/01/07/union-theft-embezzlement-theft-significant-reflects-national-business-tr/1005763001/ .
There may be fewer cement shoes, but the corruption has never ceased.
I've been in unions. And walked picket lines. Watched agency temps cross our picket line as if it wasn't there.
While I don't dispute what you say I also think that unions shoot themselves in the foot.
A union is only as worthwhile as the folk who are in it.
The last "union" thing that I did at my weekend job was show up for an informational picket outside of the facility.
The only 2 people who bothered appearing were me & the union delegate who organized the picket. No one else showed up.
Let me tell you, being 1 part of a 2 person picket doesn't make make you look like you're part of a union as much as it makes you look you're one of two sad & disgruntled whiners.
I quit the union not long after that incident.
I never walked a picket, but I was on both sides of the union issue: labor (CWA) and management (Teamsters). And I would take managements side every time at this point. Unions, as they are found in the USA, are destructive to both the workers and the business world.
None of which to say that I didn't have good union officers, or co-workers, but the whole enterprise is corrosive in the extreme. It gives extra pay for not working, not rocking the boat, and generally killing the golden goose, all because a bunch of people who cannot perform in the modern world work the political lines as opposed to the work line.
Yes, there was a time and place for them, but that is long gone, and now they are simply a drag on the economy.
The absolute bottom line for me was my bottom line. I did the math & realized that I was paying more in union dues than I was receiving in union benefits.
Granted the union gave us a grievance protocol to follow if we got in trouble but I never got in trouble so it was useless to me.
I remember how my union called me during Obama's 1st run & told me that I had to vote for him so he could "protect our wages."
I asked her to explain how he would protect our wages.
That stumped her.
I do believe I wrote in my dog's name that year.
In my defense he was a good dog.
shit now you tell me!! I would have voted for your dog that year and several more.
as a senior executive i have to give at least one shout out for unions from my (management) perspective. that would be the unions that represent the trades. They offer apprenticeships training etc. they are easy to deal with. Is there BS/ yes. but there is always BS. Are they a bit more expensive? Yes but I am willing to bet on the quality, productivity, and efficiency advantage. The only job actions i ever saw was when some a hole was trying to work around them. They created value and delivered value and it was a good relationship and the workers were compensate fairly.
Public unions on the other hand are a cancer and the majors like UAW lost their way a long time ago.
I believe in the idea of unions more so than the actual reality.
But I also believe the class war is pretty much over & the working class lost.
For now, at least.
The only folk who wouldn't cross our picket lines were truckers. 18 wheelers would screech to a halt once they saw the picket & be in the wind within minutes.
No one else gave a shit.
This is 100% garbage. Not the story itself, but what is occurring. It’s like the CA govt AND its citizens are actively and purposefully trying to make the state unlivable. I’m actually surprised there hasn’t been a bigger exodus. Govt trust is at an all time low (what a goddamned mystery that is, huh?) so I seriously doubt people are responding to or being accurate when they do respond to a census. That’s ok though, because when the entire thing gets to a state to where authoritarian intervention is the only thing that can save it, they can always blame that on the “fascist, homophobic, transphobic, xenophobic, racist right wing”. People need to wake the fuck up in 2024, stop playing the language game and push back against any iteration of this nonsense, however slight, unless they’d prefer the current degradation and devolution.
you reckon strip clubs and prostitution are novel phenomena in San Francisco?... This like the "thanks Obama" meme or something?
I don’t care if it’s novel phenomena or not. The government shouldn’t have to subsidize people selling their image sexually, or pleasure transactions vaginas or rectums or any other sexual act. Nor should they prohibit it. That’s my only point. Thought that was clear in my comment. I guess not. Let’s play a game called “guess how long before CA becomes Mad Max”. Have you been to any major downtown centers of metropolitan CA cities lately? Think things are going well?
To be honest, I think people shouldn't live in a couple of the major metro centers in California, and have thought so since I found out some of them were basically built on a desert. Hearing about people getting in fights over water rationing in the early oughts and teens reinforced that perspective for me. But no, I haven't gone down to visit in a while. I assume it's going about as well as a megalopolis teetering on the edge of a fault line siphoning water from the Colorado river (while constantly on fire in whole or in part) can be expected to though
I tend to be a bit skeptical about "falling apart" narratives though because I have actually lived in cities and I have noticed people tend to exaggerate horror stories and dystopian narratives about these places. PDX and Capitol Hill, Seattle, being a couple of examples: people talk about nonstop arsons and mob rule and people buying fentanyl from a Starbucks like it were an extra flavor in their latte, and then I go there all the time and I'm like "yeah it's basically fine. Nothing has changed."
I just put it down to people who don't live in cities really enjoy spanking the monkey while they fantasize about societal collapse for some reason.
Ive lived in major cities and seen them go downhill. I moved out specifically in 2019 because of that. One of my sons lives in what was once a very nice part of a major city that is going downhill fast. I do not like visiting him anymore. Its not shootouts on the streets or fentanyl at the Starbucks (but there are shootings) and life is still livable. (It does help to be 6'1" and 210 though) but as Jake says things are going to hell and its pretty clear the politicians care so little that one cant be blamed for assuming this is the planned outcome.
Strippers & Sex Workers & Unions Oh My!
Injecting a little salacious skin & sin into the Racket paradigm, eh Matt? (Nudge, nudge, wink wink)
Never really developed a fondness for strip clubs although I do remember my first trip to one at about 18 when my "Oh boy oh boy oh boy I'm going to see some naked girls" enthusiasm took about 40 minutes to deteriorate into "Man this place sucks. The girls just look sad. These dudes are all skeezy looking and I'm pretty sure that dude at the end of the bar has his dick out & is rubbing one out right at this moment..."
Finished my beer and left.
Think I have about 5 more strip club drive bys in my past. All equally thrilling. I can safely say that not one of them looked like a Motley Crue video.
The last one happened because the guy my buddy & I were buying weed from wanted to meet at a strip bar. While my buddy chatted to him I checked out the crowd & the girls, momentarily making eye contact with a short little Asian guy. Before I knew it the little guy was sitting next to me rubbing my boot with his wingtips. I said, "What the fuck are you doing?" He said, "Oh, Oh, I'm sorry. It's a mistake. A mistake." And he was gone.
To be fair that wasn't the last one. Later in life, when my brother's marriage was imploding, he started hanging at a strip club all of the time. He eventually scored a bouncer gig there being a sizable fellow. So I met some strippers. Discovered that the majority of them were single moms. Many of them were lesbians. And a great number of both lesbian & straight didn't have a high opinion of men. So, if strip bars are your thing, while you're sitting there staring at her boobs and convincing yourself she really wants your man meat, try to keep in mind that she's probably thinking of assorted ways she'd like to see your dumb ass kick the bucket.
Just a thought.
Real life strip clubs are not like a Motley Crue video? I'm crushed.
A good thought to share here also, thanks for it. I guess it’s not wild to see creeps white kniting for ‘’sex workers’’, I mean thats exactly what one would expect from a creep. And delusion keeps the world turning, probably always has. But these simps trying to feign an intelligent defense for exploitation and willful self destruction is super lame.
But Hunter Biden supports unionized sex work.
With him on their side what could go wrong?
- Hunter Biden came up with a plan to unionize prostitutes for their protection after “telling strippers for 25 years that they should unionize,” according to texts found on his alleged laptop. -
https://news.yahoo.com/hunter-biden-theorizes-prostitutes-form-110000681.html
Yep! It’s self-evident who is in support of this issues - the clientele! It ain’t honest moral fathers of daughters voraciously supporting the ‘sex industry’. I digress, but the same goes for the open air fentynil and tranq markets…someone out there is happily paying for $15 gum jobs from homeless addicts and they dont want their good time spoiled no matter what damage.
Is this what the Wobblies had in mind?
This is a nice appetizer but I'm waiting for the piece de resistance; Epstein's Client List
You'll never convince me that that, too, hasn't been "edited."
If you could add or subtract any name from the Epstein papers, who would it be?
I haven't seen the list yet. Is it out?
The term "sex worker" is coined by the lobby so they can exploit women better. Being penetrated by men is not a service one provides. This is not a job, because there are not promotions and the older you get the worse it gets for your "business".
Women in prostitution suffer a great deal of illnesses, both physical and mental ones, including alcohol and drug addictions to numb themselves from their sordid reality. Pimps and johns are not abusers and that leaves a toll on these women.
Besides, even if some of these women were true, real "volunteers" for "the job", the "offer" does not match the demand at all so women get trafficked to reach the numbers the industry needs. All the talk about "work" around this issue is just a way of whitewashing the exploitation of women by men.
Absurd
Sex trafficking is a whole industry unto itself and is growing at an alarming rate. Sex work, like strip dancing, is a choice made by people who are of legal age. If employers were required to pay payroll and employment taxes, like every other business, sex workers would have disability insurance, FMLA protection, medicare and social security. 🙄 No brainer as I can see it. It would also force shady business practices and people into the sunlight. Sexual harassment protections would be very challenging though.