TonioTimeDaily

"Sex work has long been criticized and stigmatized in our society. While many members of society view sex work as immoral and degrading to women, I argue that sex work is essentially just work, and that it is not necessarily harmful to women. Under circumstances in which sex work is accepted and regulated in society, in which the sex worker is protected and granted the same rights as any other laborer, sex work has the possibility to be beneficial to women.

Sex work can be very profitable for women, and many women may enjoy work that allows them to creatively express their sexuality. Sex work can allow human beings a way to safely explore their sexual desires in ways they cannot through the current social norm of heterosexual, monogamous relationships. The sex work industry and its workers need not be chastised by a society that clings to puritan ideals of what is “moral”. I argue prostitution should be legal.

Every human being has the right to make informed decisions about his or her own body, and laws that govern sex work are laws that govern an individual’s right to make decisions about her own body. Sex work is illegal because it is largely viewed as immoral and degrading, but morality is objective and society’s opinion on what is “right” and “wrong” is constantly shifting. Morality provides no sound basis for law, as people governed by laws can not possibly all share the same moral beliefs.

My argument is that prostitution should be made legal, sex workers offered the same rights and respect as workers in any other field, and that by doing this sex work can become something that benefits women and humanity in general.

In Carole Pateman’s essay, “What is Wrong With Prostitution?”, she argues that prostitution is an embodiment of patriarchy (2006). She relates to historical societies in which men had ownership over their wives, and says that while men no longer have complete ownership of women in our society, prostitution provides a way for men to exercise ownership over women’s bodies temporarily.

I disagree with this conclusion on prostitution. Men do not own a prostitute when they are paying her for sex any more than a business man owns his factory workers. If prostitutes are given the right to choose their clients and to stop sex at any point in which they feel unsafe or uncomfortable, prostitution is not a question of temporary ownership.

Another point Pateman makes in her essay distinguishes prostitution from other forms of work based on the product being paid for. Pateman argues that in other forms of labor work, the employer is paying for the product of the labor, and not the labor itself. In prostitution, the physical labor itself is the commodity (Pateman, 2006).

This argument does not hold up. Workers in any entertainment field, such as stage actors, dancers, or comedians, are paid for their actual labor, not any product which is produced by their labor. In this way, one can view the prostitute as an entertainer; the root of each type of work is essentially the same: to provide a pleasurable experience for a customer.

Finally, Pateman argues that because sexuality is so intertwined with ones personality and identity, to sell sex is to sell oneself (2006). Again, this argument is unconvincing. It is true that prostitutes are paid for exerting one aspect of their personality (their sexuality). However, prostitution is not unique in this sense.

Many workers earn a living by exerting a strong aspect of their personality. Managers are paid for their leadership abilities, teachers for their patience, and waiters for their extroversion. Why, then, is it wrong for a prostitute to profit from her sexuality?"

--- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/antonio-myers4/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/antonio-myers4/support