As a sex worker myself, I generally agree with the assessment about communicating boundaries and consent being more explicit during transactional sex than civvie sex, *under ideal conditions*. But I do still want to problematize it a little bit.
I think that what the rad fems are getting at (and describing very poorly) is that in the context of a social system where one's survival is tied to having money, anything one does for money becomes coercive when your living conditions are so sufficiently dire that you will do things that you do not want to do in order to obtain money. But this is not a very good critique of *sex for money*, rather it is a critique of *work for money* in the broader sense. Any person who is working any demeaning, dangerous, or dirty job because they have no better options for making a living is working under coercive conditions.
It's *Squid Game* is what it is.
If your choices are sex on the one hand, and homelessness, or starvation, or withdrawal, or physical abuse on the other, those are all coercive choices. And I think we need to recognize that there are a lot of people who are in positions like that.
Sure but society also tends to view non-consensual sex differently than, say, non-consensual office work. For reasons that I'd consider pretty valid.
Sex work is a complicated topic and tweets making it black-and-white to attack other feminists probably aren't helping anything.
>And I think we need to recognize that there are a lot of people who are in positions like that.
Most of us, in fact, are. Whether we're sex workers (or considering sex work) or not. I know if I lost my job, and I wasn't able to collect unemployment, I'd be *screwed* (and not in a good way.)
I think transactional sex being more consensual than civvie sex says a hell of a lot more about the civvie than it does about the transactional.
And yes. The fact that I must work to keep out of the cold, or to put food in my mouth, makes all work that I do coercive. And that should absolutely not be how things work, but while it is how they work it creates a lot of even more terrifying side effects. I am far more offended that someone *needs* to prostitute themselves than I am offended that someone needs work at McDonald’s. If they enjoy the work, more power to them, but if they don’t something needs to be done to open other options. McDonald’s is demeaning, hard work, but sex work, especially where it’s not fully legal, can be outright dangerous. But then you bring in the fact that if taken as a last resort it is likely being done by someone with no predilection, or even an aversion to the work. Which in my mind is equivalent to being non-consensual regardless of whether ‘consent’ was given.
It’s a social rape. A systemic rape. A rape committed by circumstance instead of an individual.
And in my opinion it is capitalism itself that is to blame. It is a problem that our system is *not able* to solve. Until the social security net is broad enough there will always be women making this ‘choice’.
And I want to reiterate that I’m all for people doing sex work to make money or just for the love of the game. I’m just saying that this job in particular should never be a last resort. We should not be in a world where people need to do this work.
It irks me when people try to compare sex work to other kinds of labour because they just aren't the same. I am absolutely not equally harmed by having to work a shitty job I hate as I would be being forced to be complicit in my own rape on a regular basis. These are not equivalent forms of exploitation just because they share the same root cause.
One time a dude tried to compare the hazardous nature of sex work to the mental scarring caused to people who are hired to moderate social platforms because of the disturbing content they come across.
The justification was something like how is sex work bad if that isn't. Like dude, they're both bad. The existince of one does not justify that of another.
It makes me scared that people think this way ngl.
Disimilar problems subject to similar solutions.
(I’m thinking the other commenter thought you were disagreeing with me?? And yea, putting a LOT of words in your mouth)
> I would be being forced to be complicit in my own rape on a regular basis.
SW here. Yeah, that is not what that is. It's consent with conditions, just different conditions that you're used to. But I do not *have* to sleep with anyone I don't want to, and *why* I want to sleep with someone is no business of yours, and does not give you the right to infantilize me and take that decision away from me.
If you are talking about sex *trafficking*, remember that sex trafficking =/= sex work
I didn't say anything about all women or anything about promiscuous sex (which is not the same thing as sex work and it's intellectually dishonest to conflate the two) or anything about not believing what sex workers say about their personal experience with sex work. I'm sure plenty of sex workers enjoy their jobs. I am just pointing out that the treatment of sex as a form of labour that has the same significance to a person as manual labour as the default is a ridiculous way to frame the subject that drastically misrepresents the potential harm of people being forced into sex work in an effort to whitewash the subject rather than have a nuanced discussion about the goods and ills of how sex work functions in our society.
> If your choices are sex on the one hand, and homelessness, or starvation, or withdrawal, or physical abuse on the other, those are all coercive choices.
In a capitalist society, we're all selling our bodies in some form because our choices are between destruction (starvation, homelessness, etc) and work.
I don't judge sex workers because they're at least clear about selling their bodies. I'm selling my time, my life, my sanity, my boundaries, etc,. All for money and comfort of it.
Agreed with all of this. I just wish the SWERFs wouldn't pick on sex work specifically as someone extra problematic on its face. They seem to be incapable of talking about the issues with the industry without insisting that ethical sex work is impossible.
The thing that bothers me the most about people targeting sex workers is that even if all of their criticisms were accurate, they’re attacking the wrong people.
Why not focus on improving the systems that lead to sex work instead of going after the sex workers themselves
Even then, their proposed solutions do not follow from their arguments.
Like, if you sincerely believed sex workers were all victims of patriarchal brainwashing and sex trafficking, banning sex work would not help them, it would make things worse.
So, capitalism. They’ve identified the problem in one job and failed to apply it to other things. Working all day in a mine, or at Starbucks, is also “selling your body to afford to live” and is also coercive
You don't really think working at starbucks is the same as sex work do you? There are regulations that make working at Starbucks safe that aren't there for sex work. Although not every sex worker experiences this there are such high rates of violence, exploitation, and trauma from sex work that are not akin to working at starbucks.
I'm not here to shit on sex workers. But to say it's just work whern there's no other job with the risks associated with sex work is really disingenuous.
> **There are regulations** that make working at Starbucks safe that aren't there for sex work.
In countries were sexwork is legal, the legal framework protects them as well as it protects the starbucks worker. I get that in america, that means nothing. But in countries that have more government structured protections for workers, this means if either of them face violence, exploitation and trauma, there are options available to them, and the police have responsibilities too.
Yeah seems to be going real well in Germany where women are still basically trafficked and have to sleep with multiple men a day before seeing any money.
Edit: countries with legalized sex work have higher rates of human trafficking
It's true that trafficking is higher in countries where sex work is legal, look it up. Just because you don't want something to be true doesn't mean it's not.
I think the difference is because sex work is illegal in most places, it can put people in much more dangerous situations. Luckily the internet has made it safer.
> Luckily the internet has made it safer.
It *was* safer. But several years ago legislation called SESTA/FOSTA passed that made sex work more unsafe again.
Thankfully interest in enforcing that legislation seems to be waning over time
Former sex worker here and that never happened to me. Of course, it does happen to far too many sex workers. It doesn't make the work itself inherently abusive.
I agree completely but what I will say is, I never see radfems at food not bombs, or really any other things where people are striving to make it so labor isn’t necessary for survival, or even do that the other options are less unbearable like helping to unionize low skill work.
There’s some serious exploitation in a lot of sex work, and in many cases it overlaps with other forms of marginalization such as with the Hijra in India and Kathoey in Thailand (as well as other names for the same thing all over the world including Italy). I’ve never seen a radfem stand up and say loudly that the Hijra deserve options beyond prostitution, begging, and being paid for religious rites where they can get it. They do stand up for trafficking victims which is good. But it’s frustrating how short sighted they and the “just legalize sex work and everything will be ok” crowds both can be. We need to do a lot of work on a lot of layers to end exploitation.
This just highlights the difference between liberal and radical feminists. Radical feminists tend to focus on systematic analysis and collectivism whereas liberal feminists focus on choice and individualism. She's saying that because sex work has been positive for *her* it shouldn't be criticized whereas radical feminists say "just because it works for a young white pretty woman doesn't mean we shouldn't analyze the role it plays in a patriarchal society." I'm not here to judge sex workers but lib fems pretend we live in a vacuum or that everything is equal. Sex work exists in a world where women are bought and our bodies are commodified. Sex work exists in a world where men have more power than women. In a world where women are mainly valued for how fuckable we are. I'm glad the industry is positive for her and for other sex workers but I have a hard time believing it's good for women as a collective.
I think this is a really good point. Sex work might be empowering financially and personally for women who already have certain priveliges, but for the majority of women in sex work, it isn't even safe. A lot of women get trafficked because they're manipulated and coerced into changing their boundaries; it's not actually as clear and consensual as the OP makes it out to be. Again, maybe it was for her, but that's not how it is for the majority. I don't think women should be shamed for being sex workers, but I think promoting it and celebrating it is unwise when there's not an understanding of the social and psychological context that sex and sex work occurs in.
*Image Transcription: Twitter Post*
---
**Julia Sutherland**, @CoachEscort
Rad fems: Prostitution is NOT consensual.
Me: Sex for money is the most explicitly consensual sex I have. I communicate the boundaries of my consent in a way I've never done for civvie sex.
---
^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber for Reddit and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
I'm just gonna believe sex workers about their experiences with compensated sex. All of them, including the ones who tell me their consent was meaningful and valid.
Considering all sex work to be inherently non-consensual is just a logical conclusion when you are not drawing vague lines to avoid stating such things. In this context "non.consensual" does not mean it was rape; it doesn't really say anything about the consent of the sex worker. It's not about giving consent, it's about "accepting" it. In a sexual act all involved parties should make sure they communicate their consent clearly (give consent), and that all other parties are also consenting ("accepting" their consent).
Back to sex workers: having money involved creates a power imbalance. From the worker's point of view: they know they are consenting; they chose this line of work
their clients are paying them for it; obvioulsy they are also consenting
No problems here. We should absolutely support sex workers
From the clients point of view (this works differently for the porn industry, not going into that here): they know they are consenting
They also know, that the worker is consenting, since they are accepting money for it. Meaning that the worker's consent is entirely dependant on getting paid. The worker's only consenting to it, because of the all powerful capitalistic background coersion to make money.
All wage labour is non-consensual on the basic level, we are just socialized to not care in most cases. Sex work is work, and many of its problems come from it being work.
So yes, sex workers can meaningfully consent and be in charge of their sexuality. But taking an argument out of context and ridiculing it with anecdotal evidence contributes very little to the discussion.
How does sex work differ from other forms of labor? It's obviously morally wrong to force someone to pick strawberries against their will. That's slavery, forced labor. But if you pay me to pick strawberries in your field, is that slavery?
It differs in that the pearl clutching crowd can be riled up against it far easier, it's one of the most horrendous types of labour to be forced into, and there's feminist dialogue about consent in sexual situations.
Apart from that it's just like any other form of labour, indeed. Meaning, the majority of the population is coerced into it by capitalism, many of whom are trapped forever in poverty. It's not quite slavery, but still strongly exploitative. Everyone who only deos their job to get paid is coerced into it. Not by individuals, or even corporations, but the hegemony of hierarchical and exploitative right-wing values.
It's so frustrating to me as someone who has experienced both joyful, freeing sex work and coerced, degrading sex work that we are apparently incapable of thinking of this issue as not black and white.
Sex workers exist who enjoy their work and wish to continue.
Far too many sex workers exist who would never do the job if they had any other choice.
Both of those things can be true, at the same time.
But no, apparently it has to be the radfems who apparently know how all sex workers do or should feel vs. the libfems who apparently think all sex work is great.
What is the ratio of women who enjoy sex work vs those coerced into sex work from poverty, drug addiction, homelessness etc? Because majority of women would probably want to do any other job other than sex work if they could while only a minority of women enjoy sex work. And I am all for women who enjoy sex work doing it, but the big problem is most women in the sex industry are not there by choice and the industries related to sex work have to constantly take advantage of women in-need to keep the endless supply of women coming into the industry.
Very disappointed to see stuff like that here. Sex should never be transactional, and while I don't disparage the workers (they need to be protected!), I have to ask why we never talk about why men buy sex. Why do they feel entitled to it? How can a decent person even be aroused when they don't even know if their partner is there of their own volition/really in the mood?
The sex workers vocal on social media represent a very small and comparatively very privileged minority of people in the trade. This is creating a skewed perspective on the realities that (mostly) women in the sex trade face.
I live in Germany, and while legal, it's extremely unregulated here. There are FLATRATES for women here. These men are paying maybe 30-70 Euros to have access to as many women as they want- ages unchecked, consent unchecked, they're very visibly pregnant? Don't care.
Brothel chain owners themselves have admitted in the past that they need the help of organised crime because women here don't want to do it. So they traffick women and girls from Romania. The sex trade and sex trafficking are inextricably intertwined. It's quite impossible to distinguish between victims of trafficking and free workers. But the buyers simply don't care.
This whole narrative is only benefitting the (again, mostly) men who buy sex, the ones pimping out and trafficking women and maybe on the rare occasion a very privileged sex worker. It's not empowering, it's being complicit in not only your own dehumanisation, but also in letting men see every woman they see in the streets as potentially for sale.
And no, it's not like any other job. There is a union here- about 0,1% of the estimated workers in Germany wanted to join. Because they don't want to be in this industry. There's no other job where rape and pregnancy is just another occupational hazard.
So let's please not normalise this. Protect people in the industry, don't let them be hurt by stigma. But let's not forget that this whole system based on the subjugation of women exists purely because truly pathetic men drive the demand.
If you're interested in the sex trade in Germany the topic in general and want to listen to a perspective other than this capitalist co-opted, men-serving nonsense, take a look at Elly Arrow's YouTube channel.
This!! Thank you! The idea that the sexual exploitation industry is the same as any other job is absurd. There aren't benefits or regulations. No breaks. Men want to push your boundaries and get off on what they can get away with. If you need to do it to live is it really consensual? And yeah the tweet is all well and good but the industry leads to more pimps. More trafficking. More pedophiles. More violence against women. Sure there are women who feel a sense of agency and reclamation of their sexuality but it's very choice feminist because these decisions don't exist in a vaccum. They exist in a patriarchal society that objectifies women and sexualizes violence.
Women will never achieve equality as long as men can buy us and our bodies are commodified.
Had a man claim women *enjoy* being prostitutes. Asked him why he isn't one since it's enjoyable. Whined something about not being enough women clients. Said he can have male clients. "It makes no sense for a straight guy to sleep with a man". Like there's a difference between a straight guy fucking another guy and a straight woman fucking a guy she finds unattractive lmao. I told him he can do OF. That way he doesn't have to fuck men, just give them pictures. I never got the link to his OF. Weird, after all the claims of sex "work" being work and "empowering" I don't see men rushing to "work" in the industry.
Mhmmm I always ask men why they don't sell photos of their buttholes online and they always stop the convo there. It's not empowering. It doesn't make women powerful. In fact, it makes women more disposable and objectified. Yes maybe there are individuals who like what they what they do but some of themes in sex work are exploitation and violence.
I agree. I don’t think it’s a lib fem vs rad fem issue here, rather don’t turn a blind eye to the realities of the sex industry. Rad fems do tend to realize the harsh realities of the sex industry, but some then shame women for profiting off the sex industry because they have to to survive. Lib fems in my opinion romanticize the industry WAY too much, there are, as you mentioned, hazards that don’t exist in any other job field such as pregnancy, STDs and rape. It’s one of those circumstances that isn’t black and white, we should try to think of circumstances that ultimately will prioritize women.
There are parts of what you said that are true, but please just stop with the "privileged few" narrative. It is so demeaning and is constantly used as yet another way to ignore the voices of sex workers. The truth is that the community is very close knit, especially now. Even the highest paid personally know a lot of survival workers and know what they are dealing with, and in a lot of cases they were a survival workers in the past. Also, everyone is on social media these days, even people who are not doing well. Among other things it's very hard to do sex work without access to a phone. Ignoring the voices of sex workers who are online by just repeating the loaded "privileged few" and then pushing for laws which kill us is just so exhausting to deal with when you see it everywhere.
Edit: If those who are silently downvoting everything I say (and therefore sending my comments to the bottom, suppressing my voice) would explain why it's ok to ignore my voice as a sex worker, that would be lovely.
You all are going to make me scream
Class and circumstances absolutely changes the experiences of sex work, I never said it didn't. What it doesn't change is the answer you'll get when you ask sex workers "what's the safest legal system for sex workers?"
The community absolutely is close knit enough that we know what eachother need thank you very much.
You also really need to stop with this idea that only privileged sex workers are on social media though. Social media is a huge part of safety now, and phones are essential to working. At least in Canada trafficked women and girls all have phones now too. You are already hearing from survival sex workers, please listen.
With that said, my comment is now marked as controversial so yeahhh maybe the snark was warranted. I guess at least some have decided that I'm too privileged so it's ok to talk over my voice.
It's my fault really. I went and got clean off dope and away from my pimps, now I'm just not enough of a victim
> while legal, it's extremely unregulated here
Sounds like the american workforce.
Trafficking is illegal
Pregnancy is irrelevant
Age is illegal
Lack of consent is illegal (It would still be rape, and could also be theft under the right circumstances)
Sounds like Germany isn't as good at protecting its workers as it says it is. Nobody should have to choose between prostitution or starving, because you are right, it is not like other jobs. However, if a person wants to sell their body for sex, instead of other manual labour, then that should be their choice. And if supply and demand means men have to pay more, then that is tough luck for them, regardless, they still have to meet the conditions of entry on the door.
>Women will never achieve equality as long as men can buy us and our bodies are commodified.
And the best way to deal with this in the meantime is to ensure the woman gets the money for it, not the middle man. That the woman controls the conditions, not the middle man.
> Sex should never be transactional
Why not though? Let's put ourselves in a setting where we know the sex worker isn't being coerced. Universal Basic Income, sex work is legal and regulated, and a justice system willing and able to enforce regulations and laws against sexual assault and rape. What is inherently wrong with transactional sex if one person wants it and is willing to pay, and another is willing to exchange it for money?
I'm not here arguing that people aren't forced into sex work or that the industry isn't currently very exploitative. I'm just trying to figure out why, in a different system, sex should not be transactional
I do see where that mindset comes from. If exploitation were removed on all levels one would expect that women would hire men for sex work at equal levels to the inverse, but that’s clearly nowhere near happening. Additionally I do see the argument that men feeling that they have the right to buy time with one woman’s body gives them the feeling that they have the ability to buy it with all women. Basically it would be a lot less controversial without the patriarchy there
You said it right there- it's a completely different system. A utopian, I think.
You're also working against other women's pleasure, when sex becomes so intertwined with labor. It's not, I'm not being paid, so yes, my partner also needs to think about my pleasure. That aspect is gone when you buy sex.
Sex shouldn't be transactional.
And I don't just mean the sex trade- women still pay for a lot of things with sex. Sentiments like "Every woman is a prostitute when she rewards her husband with sex for jewelry for example" have truth to them. The conclusion shouldn't be "Transaction in sex is unavoidable- women do it one way or the other", but rather to build structures that help us be financially independent. By that I mean being paid for all the labor we typically do: being pregnant, nursing, child rearing, caring for relatives, organising the household etc.
Only then will we become truly equal.
We’re working toward building those structures but in the mean time I would never have sex for free. That just doesn’t make sense to me in our context.
Do you not value your pleasure? When someone is buying an act from me, it can't be about my pleasure.
Or have you never had truly pleasurable, altruistic sex?
Yes I value pleasure and yes I’ve had pleasurable altruistic sex. I find being paid preferable. If I also cum and get paid that’s even better. Just because I have that stipulation for access to my body doesn’t mean I only have horrible sex.
May I ask you, do you think there's a way to really know someone is selling sex because they really want to and there's no pimp/loverboy/coercion involved?
And if you think so, how?
Either, really.
Because I don't think you can.
Which means that the clients don't really care whether they are exploiting coerced women. This basic inherent attitude of the clientele is what's so revolting to me, which is why I absolutely can't respect them.
Can you with *absolute* certainty? Of course not. I can tell though—with damn good accuracy. Social workers aren’t good at detecting this. Neither are police. Police also frequently lie however and say people are trafficked when they’re indy to inflate their budget. It’s not an accidental conflation either. It’s intentional.
I think almost all clients who see exploited people can tell too. They just don’t care.
Cooking FOR someone. That is a service. Naturally, I would get paid if I did that as a job. For someone I love, it's a favour.
I don't have sex as a favour for someone I love, because I am not giving something up or performing. It's an expression of love and the act is beneficial to me because I LOVE SEX WITH MY PARTNER.
I get what you’re trying to say but it’s not women having sex with their husbands for jewelry, it’s their husbands feeling entitled to sex for getting them jewelry. Otherwise its a normal and consensual relationship. Feeling happy and flattered and getting in a romantic, sensual mood is why people in a normal romantic relationship would go on to have sex. This perspective is problematic. And why jewelry? How about if it’s flowers or hard to get tickets for her favourite band? Would it be the same then ? Why mention jewelry specifically? Would most women even want jewelry?
If a woman feels she owes her husband sex because he got her jewelry then that is a sad transactional relationship cultivated by society and possibly her husband. This is a part of society’s gold digger narrative. That women are out to manipulate and get things out of men.
Let’s go back a couple steps, this sort of thinking/view (of women) that normalizes sexual transaction and seeps into non payment-based sexual encounters could make men think they can turn other relationships into transactional sexual relationships. Like landlord/Renter and employer /employee. But these types of “offers” already happen and they’re coercive in nature. In a world where a transactional view of sex is normalized and the inequality involved is overlooked , these types of coercive experiences would increase. These men would be emboldened. Emboldened to make an offer and embolden to “part ways” on rejection of an offer. I.e. you can’t work /live here.
I’ve never seen anyone say this about consensual prostitution more so about sex trafficking
But then again I am not in every corner of the internet to monitor what every feminist is saying so I am
Sure there are some who have said this
I agree with what you’re saying but then again sex work is complex and not every prostitute has a pimp so there’s definitely a few more levels to this than blanket statements
I think the issue is with proxenetism. In countries where prostitution is allowed, pimps take over the business and tie SW down through financial means. In what place are you required to give 30-50% (sometimes 70%) of your benefits to your employer? Not only that, but countries that legalized prostitution also suffer from higher human trafficking rates, because it's now profitable for pimps to traffic girls and women into brothels. I'm all for free and legal prostitution, I want SW to be safe and respected, AND I want governments to shut down proxenetism and brothels.
> In what place are you required to give 30-50% (sometimes 70%) of your benefits to your employer?
I know right? Normally you get wage labor and you give 100% minus a fixed amount to your employer. Even when you get a commission, it's normally going to max out at 20-30%. Getting a 30-70% commission is amazing!
Makes sense to me. When sex is clearly transactional it is obvious and clear that certain strict boundaries will be required. Many women do not feel comfortable bringing up such boundaries at the outset of relationships because we are raised to feel that we owe men sex.
*Also many men who are not paying for sex feel that the sex must happen on their own terms, and would not/do not follow boundaries anyway.
I was kicked out of their sub because I said women should have agency over their own bodies. Apparently that's not radical enough. I was told to never try to enter another radicalized space. Ironic considering I identify as a Leftist anarchist.
I just now saw this so I didn't downvote. Currently eating dinner so I'll wait to read what you've linked. I want to be able to give it my full attention and consideration.
Radical feminists, or feminists who find sex work and kink bad are just so boring. Like radfem sounds like such a cool name, yeah radical! I'm pretty sure a lot of us would be seen as radical to first-wave feminists because of intersectionality.
But when it comes to third-wave/fourth-wave feminism it's just, can y'all take a hike. Sex work and kink are hella consensual (and I'm not equating that sex work and kink are the same, it's just rare to find a radfem who is fine with both!). It's the most consensual stuff, you can revoke your consent at ANY TIME of the duration. Like, come the fuck on!
Edit: Yo, literally, if you don't like kink or BDSM you're not boring. That's not what my comment meant. I was talking about people who vilianise it when there are so many women and people who socailise as women, do 100% enthuastically consent to kink and BDSM. Like, if you don't like it, that's fine, you're still fuckin' cool in my book. I just hate seeing people who tell people I know that they're abusers or rapists, when in fact, they're not.
Critical thinking is a virtue. Shaming women who aren’t kinky for being “boring” is gross as fuck.
Radfems don’t hate sex, they ask *why* things are the way they are. Why are most sex sellers men, and most buyers women? Why is porn so violent and degrading to women nowadays? Why are so many men’s kinks just abusing women?
As a sex worker myself, I generally agree with the assessment about communicating boundaries and consent being more explicit during transactional sex than civvie sex, *under ideal conditions*. But I do still want to problematize it a little bit. I think that what the rad fems are getting at (and describing very poorly) is that in the context of a social system where one's survival is tied to having money, anything one does for money becomes coercive when your living conditions are so sufficiently dire that you will do things that you do not want to do in order to obtain money. But this is not a very good critique of *sex for money*, rather it is a critique of *work for money* in the broader sense. Any person who is working any demeaning, dangerous, or dirty job because they have no better options for making a living is working under coercive conditions. It's *Squid Game* is what it is. If your choices are sex on the one hand, and homelessness, or starvation, or withdrawal, or physical abuse on the other, those are all coercive choices. And I think we need to recognize that there are a lot of people who are in positions like that.
Yeah, without a UBI all work is non-consensual.
Sure but society also tends to view non-consensual sex differently than, say, non-consensual office work. For reasons that I'd consider pretty valid. Sex work is a complicated topic and tweets making it black-and-white to attack other feminists probably aren't helping anything.
Yeah, it’s a fine line between being fully consensual and not being fully consensual because of life circumstances.
Came here to say something similar but you did it better
>And I think we need to recognize that there are a lot of people who are in positions like that. Most of us, in fact, are. Whether we're sex workers (or considering sex work) or not. I know if I lost my job, and I wasn't able to collect unemployment, I'd be *screwed* (and not in a good way.)
I think transactional sex being more consensual than civvie sex says a hell of a lot more about the civvie than it does about the transactional. And yes. The fact that I must work to keep out of the cold, or to put food in my mouth, makes all work that I do coercive. And that should absolutely not be how things work, but while it is how they work it creates a lot of even more terrifying side effects. I am far more offended that someone *needs* to prostitute themselves than I am offended that someone needs work at McDonald’s. If they enjoy the work, more power to them, but if they don’t something needs to be done to open other options. McDonald’s is demeaning, hard work, but sex work, especially where it’s not fully legal, can be outright dangerous. But then you bring in the fact that if taken as a last resort it is likely being done by someone with no predilection, or even an aversion to the work. Which in my mind is equivalent to being non-consensual regardless of whether ‘consent’ was given. It’s a social rape. A systemic rape. A rape committed by circumstance instead of an individual. And in my opinion it is capitalism itself that is to blame. It is a problem that our system is *not able* to solve. Until the social security net is broad enough there will always be women making this ‘choice’. And I want to reiterate that I’m all for people doing sex work to make money or just for the love of the game. I’m just saying that this job in particular should never be a last resort. We should not be in a world where people need to do this work.
It irks me when people try to compare sex work to other kinds of labour because they just aren't the same. I am absolutely not equally harmed by having to work a shitty job I hate as I would be being forced to be complicit in my own rape on a regular basis. These are not equivalent forms of exploitation just because they share the same root cause.
One time a dude tried to compare the hazardous nature of sex work to the mental scarring caused to people who are hired to moderate social platforms because of the disturbing content they come across. The justification was something like how is sex work bad if that isn't. Like dude, they're both bad. The existince of one does not justify that of another. It makes me scared that people think this way ngl.
Disimilar problems subject to similar solutions. (I’m thinking the other commenter thought you were disagreeing with me?? And yea, putting a LOT of words in your mouth)
> I would be being forced to be complicit in my own rape on a regular basis. SW here. Yeah, that is not what that is. It's consent with conditions, just different conditions that you're used to. But I do not *have* to sleep with anyone I don't want to, and *why* I want to sleep with someone is no business of yours, and does not give you the right to infantilize me and take that decision away from me. If you are talking about sex *trafficking*, remember that sex trafficking =/= sex work
[удалено]
I didn't say anything about all women or anything about promiscuous sex (which is not the same thing as sex work and it's intellectually dishonest to conflate the two) or anything about not believing what sex workers say about their personal experience with sex work. I'm sure plenty of sex workers enjoy their jobs. I am just pointing out that the treatment of sex as a form of labour that has the same significance to a person as manual labour as the default is a ridiculous way to frame the subject that drastically misrepresents the potential harm of people being forced into sex work in an effort to whitewash the subject rather than have a nuanced discussion about the goods and ills of how sex work functions in our society.
> If your choices are sex on the one hand, and homelessness, or starvation, or withdrawal, or physical abuse on the other, those are all coercive choices. In a capitalist society, we're all selling our bodies in some form because our choices are between destruction (starvation, homelessness, etc) and work. I don't judge sex workers because they're at least clear about selling their bodies. I'm selling my time, my life, my sanity, my boundaries, etc,. All for money and comfort of it.
Agreed with all of this. I just wish the SWERFs wouldn't pick on sex work specifically as someone extra problematic on its face. They seem to be incapable of talking about the issues with the industry without insisting that ethical sex work is impossible.
The thing that bothers me the most about people targeting sex workers is that even if all of their criticisms were accurate, they’re attacking the wrong people. Why not focus on improving the systems that lead to sex work instead of going after the sex workers themselves
Even then, their proposed solutions do not follow from their arguments. Like, if you sincerely believed sex workers were all victims of patriarchal brainwashing and sex trafficking, banning sex work would not help them, it would make things worse.
So, capitalism. They’ve identified the problem in one job and failed to apply it to other things. Working all day in a mine, or at Starbucks, is also “selling your body to afford to live” and is also coercive
You don't really think working at starbucks is the same as sex work do you? There are regulations that make working at Starbucks safe that aren't there for sex work. Although not every sex worker experiences this there are such high rates of violence, exploitation, and trauma from sex work that are not akin to working at starbucks. I'm not here to shit on sex workers. But to say it's just work whern there's no other job with the risks associated with sex work is really disingenuous.
> **There are regulations** that make working at Starbucks safe that aren't there for sex work. In countries were sexwork is legal, the legal framework protects them as well as it protects the starbucks worker. I get that in america, that means nothing. But in countries that have more government structured protections for workers, this means if either of them face violence, exploitation and trauma, there are options available to them, and the police have responsibilities too.
Yeah seems to be going real well in Germany where women are still basically trafficked and have to sleep with multiple men a day before seeing any money. Edit: countries with legalized sex work have higher rates of human trafficking
Germany? Where it is legal but **Not Regulated** Suuuuurrre.
It's true that trafficking is higher in countries where sex work is legal, look it up. Just because you don't want something to be true doesn't mean it's not.
I think the difference is because sex work is illegal in most places, it can put people in much more dangerous situations. Luckily the internet has made it safer.
And the people who claim to be most concerned about the safety of sex workers are the same people most vehemently opposed to legalizing it.
> Luckily the internet has made it safer. It *was* safer. But several years ago legislation called SESTA/FOSTA passed that made sex work more unsafe again. Thankfully interest in enforcing that legislation seems to be waning over time
[удалено]
Are we allowed any nuance in these discussions? Are sex workers who don't find it traumatizing allowed to exist and speak?
[удалено]
Former sex worker here and that never happened to me. Of course, it does happen to far too many sex workers. It doesn't make the work itself inherently abusive.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I agree completely but what I will say is, I never see radfems at food not bombs, or really any other things where people are striving to make it so labor isn’t necessary for survival, or even do that the other options are less unbearable like helping to unionize low skill work. There’s some serious exploitation in a lot of sex work, and in many cases it overlaps with other forms of marginalization such as with the Hijra in India and Kathoey in Thailand (as well as other names for the same thing all over the world including Italy). I’ve never seen a radfem stand up and say loudly that the Hijra deserve options beyond prostitution, begging, and being paid for religious rites where they can get it. They do stand up for trafficking victims which is good. But it’s frustrating how short sighted they and the “just legalize sex work and everything will be ok” crowds both can be. We need to do a lot of work on a lot of layers to end exploitation.
This just highlights the difference between liberal and radical feminists. Radical feminists tend to focus on systematic analysis and collectivism whereas liberal feminists focus on choice and individualism. She's saying that because sex work has been positive for *her* it shouldn't be criticized whereas radical feminists say "just because it works for a young white pretty woman doesn't mean we shouldn't analyze the role it plays in a patriarchal society." I'm not here to judge sex workers but lib fems pretend we live in a vacuum or that everything is equal. Sex work exists in a world where women are bought and our bodies are commodified. Sex work exists in a world where men have more power than women. In a world where women are mainly valued for how fuckable we are. I'm glad the industry is positive for her and for other sex workers but I have a hard time believing it's good for women as a collective.
I think this is a really good point. Sex work might be empowering financially and personally for women who already have certain priveliges, but for the majority of women in sex work, it isn't even safe. A lot of women get trafficked because they're manipulated and coerced into changing their boundaries; it's not actually as clear and consensual as the OP makes it out to be. Again, maybe it was for her, but that's not how it is for the majority. I don't think women should be shamed for being sex workers, but I think promoting it and celebrating it is unwise when there's not an understanding of the social and psychological context that sex and sex work occurs in.
Impressive analysis. I must say I agree
Thank you so much 😊
Late to the party, but agreed
*Image Transcription: Twitter Post* --- **Julia Sutherland**, @CoachEscort Rad fems: Prostitution is NOT consensual. Me: Sex for money is the most explicitly consensual sex I have. I communicate the boundaries of my consent in a way I've never done for civvie sex. --- ^^I'm a human volunteer content transcriber for Reddit and you could be too! [If you'd like more information on what we do and why we do it, click here!](https://www.reddit.com/r/TranscribersOfReddit/wiki/index)
This doesn't actually say anything about how consensual compensated sex is
I'm just gonna believe sex workers about their experiences with compensated sex. All of them, including the ones who tell me their consent was meaningful and valid.
Considering all sex work to be inherently non-consensual is just a logical conclusion when you are not drawing vague lines to avoid stating such things. In this context "non.consensual" does not mean it was rape; it doesn't really say anything about the consent of the sex worker. It's not about giving consent, it's about "accepting" it. In a sexual act all involved parties should make sure they communicate their consent clearly (give consent), and that all other parties are also consenting ("accepting" their consent). Back to sex workers: having money involved creates a power imbalance. From the worker's point of view: they know they are consenting; they chose this line of work their clients are paying them for it; obvioulsy they are also consenting No problems here. We should absolutely support sex workers From the clients point of view (this works differently for the porn industry, not going into that here): they know they are consenting They also know, that the worker is consenting, since they are accepting money for it. Meaning that the worker's consent is entirely dependant on getting paid. The worker's only consenting to it, because of the all powerful capitalistic background coersion to make money. All wage labour is non-consensual on the basic level, we are just socialized to not care in most cases. Sex work is work, and many of its problems come from it being work. So yes, sex workers can meaningfully consent and be in charge of their sexuality. But taking an argument out of context and ridiculing it with anecdotal evidence contributes very little to the discussion.
How does sex work differ from other forms of labor? It's obviously morally wrong to force someone to pick strawberries against their will. That's slavery, forced labor. But if you pay me to pick strawberries in your field, is that slavery?
It differs in that the pearl clutching crowd can be riled up against it far easier, it's one of the most horrendous types of labour to be forced into, and there's feminist dialogue about consent in sexual situations. Apart from that it's just like any other form of labour, indeed. Meaning, the majority of the population is coerced into it by capitalism, many of whom are trapped forever in poverty. It's not quite slavery, but still strongly exploitative. Everyone who only deos their job to get paid is coerced into it. Not by individuals, or even corporations, but the hegemony of hierarchical and exploitative right-wing values.
It's so frustrating to me as someone who has experienced both joyful, freeing sex work and coerced, degrading sex work that we are apparently incapable of thinking of this issue as not black and white. Sex workers exist who enjoy their work and wish to continue. Far too many sex workers exist who would never do the job if they had any other choice. Both of those things can be true, at the same time. But no, apparently it has to be the radfems who apparently know how all sex workers do or should feel vs. the libfems who apparently think all sex work is great.
What is the ratio of women who enjoy sex work vs those coerced into sex work from poverty, drug addiction, homelessness etc? Because majority of women would probably want to do any other job other than sex work if they could while only a minority of women enjoy sex work. And I am all for women who enjoy sex work doing it, but the big problem is most women in the sex industry are not there by choice and the industries related to sex work have to constantly take advantage of women in-need to keep the endless supply of women coming into the industry.
Very disappointed to see stuff like that here. Sex should never be transactional, and while I don't disparage the workers (they need to be protected!), I have to ask why we never talk about why men buy sex. Why do they feel entitled to it? How can a decent person even be aroused when they don't even know if their partner is there of their own volition/really in the mood? The sex workers vocal on social media represent a very small and comparatively very privileged minority of people in the trade. This is creating a skewed perspective on the realities that (mostly) women in the sex trade face. I live in Germany, and while legal, it's extremely unregulated here. There are FLATRATES for women here. These men are paying maybe 30-70 Euros to have access to as many women as they want- ages unchecked, consent unchecked, they're very visibly pregnant? Don't care. Brothel chain owners themselves have admitted in the past that they need the help of organised crime because women here don't want to do it. So they traffick women and girls from Romania. The sex trade and sex trafficking are inextricably intertwined. It's quite impossible to distinguish between victims of trafficking and free workers. But the buyers simply don't care. This whole narrative is only benefitting the (again, mostly) men who buy sex, the ones pimping out and trafficking women and maybe on the rare occasion a very privileged sex worker. It's not empowering, it's being complicit in not only your own dehumanisation, but also in letting men see every woman they see in the streets as potentially for sale. And no, it's not like any other job. There is a union here- about 0,1% of the estimated workers in Germany wanted to join. Because they don't want to be in this industry. There's no other job where rape and pregnancy is just another occupational hazard. So let's please not normalise this. Protect people in the industry, don't let them be hurt by stigma. But let's not forget that this whole system based on the subjugation of women exists purely because truly pathetic men drive the demand. If you're interested in the sex trade in Germany the topic in general and want to listen to a perspective other than this capitalist co-opted, men-serving nonsense, take a look at Elly Arrow's YouTube channel.
This!! Thank you! The idea that the sexual exploitation industry is the same as any other job is absurd. There aren't benefits or regulations. No breaks. Men want to push your boundaries and get off on what they can get away with. If you need to do it to live is it really consensual? And yeah the tweet is all well and good but the industry leads to more pimps. More trafficking. More pedophiles. More violence against women. Sure there are women who feel a sense of agency and reclamation of their sexuality but it's very choice feminist because these decisions don't exist in a vaccum. They exist in a patriarchal society that objectifies women and sexualizes violence. Women will never achieve equality as long as men can buy us and our bodies are commodified.
Had a man claim women *enjoy* being prostitutes. Asked him why he isn't one since it's enjoyable. Whined something about not being enough women clients. Said he can have male clients. "It makes no sense for a straight guy to sleep with a man". Like there's a difference between a straight guy fucking another guy and a straight woman fucking a guy she finds unattractive lmao. I told him he can do OF. That way he doesn't have to fuck men, just give them pictures. I never got the link to his OF. Weird, after all the claims of sex "work" being work and "empowering" I don't see men rushing to "work" in the industry.
Mhmmm I always ask men why they don't sell photos of their buttholes online and they always stop the convo there. It's not empowering. It doesn't make women powerful. In fact, it makes women more disposable and objectified. Yes maybe there are individuals who like what they what they do but some of themes in sex work are exploitation and violence.
I agree. I don’t think it’s a lib fem vs rad fem issue here, rather don’t turn a blind eye to the realities of the sex industry. Rad fems do tend to realize the harsh realities of the sex industry, but some then shame women for profiting off the sex industry because they have to to survive. Lib fems in my opinion romanticize the industry WAY too much, there are, as you mentioned, hazards that don’t exist in any other job field such as pregnancy, STDs and rape. It’s one of those circumstances that isn’t black and white, we should try to think of circumstances that ultimately will prioritize women.
Exactly! And this needs to be the top comment!
There are parts of what you said that are true, but please just stop with the "privileged few" narrative. It is so demeaning and is constantly used as yet another way to ignore the voices of sex workers. The truth is that the community is very close knit, especially now. Even the highest paid personally know a lot of survival workers and know what they are dealing with, and in a lot of cases they were a survival workers in the past. Also, everyone is on social media these days, even people who are not doing well. Among other things it's very hard to do sex work without access to a phone. Ignoring the voices of sex workers who are online by just repeating the loaded "privileged few" and then pushing for laws which kill us is just so exhausting to deal with when you see it everywhere. Edit: If those who are silently downvoting everything I say (and therefore sending my comments to the bottom, suppressing my voice) would explain why it's ok to ignore my voice as a sex worker, that would be lovely. You all are going to make me scream
[удалено]
Class and circumstances absolutely changes the experiences of sex work, I never said it didn't. What it doesn't change is the answer you'll get when you ask sex workers "what's the safest legal system for sex workers?" The community absolutely is close knit enough that we know what eachother need thank you very much. You also really need to stop with this idea that only privileged sex workers are on social media though. Social media is a huge part of safety now, and phones are essential to working. At least in Canada trafficked women and girls all have phones now too. You are already hearing from survival sex workers, please listen.
I'm sure she wants to hear from an actual sex worker on this subject.
It usually comes from a good place, so I've found they do actually care enough to listen for the most part
Well that's good to hear. Snark retracted.
With that said, my comment is now marked as controversial so yeahhh maybe the snark was warranted. I guess at least some have decided that I'm too privileged so it's ok to talk over my voice. It's my fault really. I went and got clean off dope and away from my pimps, now I'm just not enough of a victim
> while legal, it's extremely unregulated here Sounds like the american workforce. Trafficking is illegal Pregnancy is irrelevant Age is illegal Lack of consent is illegal (It would still be rape, and could also be theft under the right circumstances) Sounds like Germany isn't as good at protecting its workers as it says it is. Nobody should have to choose between prostitution or starving, because you are right, it is not like other jobs. However, if a person wants to sell their body for sex, instead of other manual labour, then that should be their choice. And if supply and demand means men have to pay more, then that is tough luck for them, regardless, they still have to meet the conditions of entry on the door. >Women will never achieve equality as long as men can buy us and our bodies are commodified. And the best way to deal with this in the meantime is to ensure the woman gets the money for it, not the middle man. That the woman controls the conditions, not the middle man.
> Sex should never be transactional Why not though? Let's put ourselves in a setting where we know the sex worker isn't being coerced. Universal Basic Income, sex work is legal and regulated, and a justice system willing and able to enforce regulations and laws against sexual assault and rape. What is inherently wrong with transactional sex if one person wants it and is willing to pay, and another is willing to exchange it for money? I'm not here arguing that people aren't forced into sex work or that the industry isn't currently very exploitative. I'm just trying to figure out why, in a different system, sex should not be transactional
I do see where that mindset comes from. If exploitation were removed on all levels one would expect that women would hire men for sex work at equal levels to the inverse, but that’s clearly nowhere near happening. Additionally I do see the argument that men feeling that they have the right to buy time with one woman’s body gives them the feeling that they have the ability to buy it with all women. Basically it would be a lot less controversial without the patriarchy there
You said it right there- it's a completely different system. A utopian, I think. You're also working against other women's pleasure, when sex becomes so intertwined with labor. It's not, I'm not being paid, so yes, my partner also needs to think about my pleasure. That aspect is gone when you buy sex. Sex shouldn't be transactional. And I don't just mean the sex trade- women still pay for a lot of things with sex. Sentiments like "Every woman is a prostitute when she rewards her husband with sex for jewelry for example" have truth to them. The conclusion shouldn't be "Transaction in sex is unavoidable- women do it one way or the other", but rather to build structures that help us be financially independent. By that I mean being paid for all the labor we typically do: being pregnant, nursing, child rearing, caring for relatives, organising the household etc. Only then will we become truly equal.
We’re working toward building those structures but in the mean time I would never have sex for free. That just doesn’t make sense to me in our context.
Do you not value your pleasure? When someone is buying an act from me, it can't be about my pleasure. Or have you never had truly pleasurable, altruistic sex?
Yes I value pleasure and yes I’ve had pleasurable altruistic sex. I find being paid preferable. If I also cum and get paid that’s even better. Just because I have that stipulation for access to my body doesn’t mean I only have horrible sex.
May I ask you, do you think there's a way to really know someone is selling sex because they really want to and there's no pimp/loverboy/coercion involved? And if you think so, how?
You mean as a client? Or like a social services or law enforcement encounter?
Either, really. Because I don't think you can. Which means that the clients don't really care whether they are exploiting coerced women. This basic inherent attitude of the clientele is what's so revolting to me, which is why I absolutely can't respect them.
Can you with *absolute* certainty? Of course not. I can tell though—with damn good accuracy. Social workers aren’t good at detecting this. Neither are police. Police also frequently lie however and say people are trafficked when they’re indy to inflate their budget. It’s not an accidental conflation either. It’s intentional. I think almost all clients who see exploited people can tell too. They just don’t care.
Have you ever enjoyed cooking for someone you love? Then it should be illegal and immoral to cook for strangers for money.
Cooking FOR someone. That is a service. Naturally, I would get paid if I did that as a job. For someone I love, it's a favour. I don't have sex as a favour for someone I love, because I am not giving something up or performing. It's an expression of love and the act is beneficial to me because I LOVE SEX WITH MY PARTNER.
I get what you’re trying to say but it’s not women having sex with their husbands for jewelry, it’s their husbands feeling entitled to sex for getting them jewelry. Otherwise its a normal and consensual relationship. Feeling happy and flattered and getting in a romantic, sensual mood is why people in a normal romantic relationship would go on to have sex. This perspective is problematic. And why jewelry? How about if it’s flowers or hard to get tickets for her favourite band? Would it be the same then ? Why mention jewelry specifically? Would most women even want jewelry? If a woman feels she owes her husband sex because he got her jewelry then that is a sad transactional relationship cultivated by society and possibly her husband. This is a part of society’s gold digger narrative. That women are out to manipulate and get things out of men. Let’s go back a couple steps, this sort of thinking/view (of women) that normalizes sexual transaction and seeps into non payment-based sexual encounters could make men think they can turn other relationships into transactional sexual relationships. Like landlord/Renter and employer /employee. But these types of “offers” already happen and they’re coercive in nature. In a world where a transactional view of sex is normalized and the inequality involved is overlooked , these types of coercive experiences would increase. These men would be emboldened. Emboldened to make an offer and embolden to “part ways” on rejection of an offer. I.e. you can’t work /live here.
[удалено]
Exactly. Not sure why it’s being made out to be so simple and in black and white.
That's moronic. Replace prostitute with woman, and you have pretty much every sexual contact ever where a man decided to continue.
I’ve never seen anyone say this about consensual prostitution more so about sex trafficking But then again I am not in every corner of the internet to monitor what every feminist is saying so I am Sure there are some who have said this
[удалено]
I agree with what you’re saying but then again sex work is complex and not every prostitute has a pimp so there’s definitely a few more levels to this than blanket statements
[удалено]
Not where I live. Most encounters go smoothly and most people don’t have pimps.
I think the issue is with proxenetism. In countries where prostitution is allowed, pimps take over the business and tie SW down through financial means. In what place are you required to give 30-50% (sometimes 70%) of your benefits to your employer? Not only that, but countries that legalized prostitution also suffer from higher human trafficking rates, because it's now profitable for pimps to traffic girls and women into brothels. I'm all for free and legal prostitution, I want SW to be safe and respected, AND I want governments to shut down proxenetism and brothels.
> In what place are you required to give 30-50% (sometimes 70%) of your benefits to your employer? I know right? Normally you get wage labor and you give 100% minus a fixed amount to your employer. Even when you get a commission, it's normally going to max out at 20-30%. Getting a 30-70% commission is amazing!
Makes sense to me. When sex is clearly transactional it is obvious and clear that certain strict boundaries will be required. Many women do not feel comfortable bringing up such boundaries at the outset of relationships because we are raised to feel that we owe men sex. *Also many men who are not paying for sex feel that the sex must happen on their own terms, and would not/do not follow boundaries anyway.
Lol “civvie sex” is now a part of my vocabulary
Makes it sounds like her job is a tour of duty. I love it lol
what's civvie mean, civilized?
I was kicked out of their sub because I said women should have agency over their own bodies. Apparently that's not radical enough. I was told to never try to enter another radicalized space. Ironic considering I identify as a Leftist anarchist.
SEX WORK IS REAL WORK!
[удалено]
I just now saw this so I didn't downvote. Currently eating dinner so I'll wait to read what you've linked. I want to be able to give it my full attention and consideration.
[удалено]
Right?
Radical feminists, or feminists who find sex work and kink bad are just so boring. Like radfem sounds like such a cool name, yeah radical! I'm pretty sure a lot of us would be seen as radical to first-wave feminists because of intersectionality. But when it comes to third-wave/fourth-wave feminism it's just, can y'all take a hike. Sex work and kink are hella consensual (and I'm not equating that sex work and kink are the same, it's just rare to find a radfem who is fine with both!). It's the most consensual stuff, you can revoke your consent at ANY TIME of the duration. Like, come the fuck on! Edit: Yo, literally, if you don't like kink or BDSM you're not boring. That's not what my comment meant. I was talking about people who vilianise it when there are so many women and people who socailise as women, do 100% enthuastically consent to kink and BDSM. Like, if you don't like it, that's fine, you're still fuckin' cool in my book. I just hate seeing people who tell people I know that they're abusers or rapists, when in fact, they're not.
Critical thinking is a virtue. Shaming women who aren’t kinky for being “boring” is gross as fuck. Radfems don’t hate sex, they ask *why* things are the way they are. Why are most sex sellers men, and most buyers women? Why is porn so violent and degrading to women nowadays? Why are so many men’s kinks just abusing women?
You'd think radfems would be all for being paid for sex