for an ad-free Fetcheveryone experience!

Power and exploitation - please check my sanity

8 watchers

Prev
1
2
3
4
5
6
Next
Last

HappyG(rrr) Sep 2018 10:55am, 27 Sep 2018 29,242 posts	0 HappyG(rrr) I think that's what quite a few folk are telling me, my wife included, Hendo. So thanks for your input on debate. And serendipity indeed then to have had a chance for your to air your "... cck..." in person. Have you copyrighted "Any cnt can run 3 miles!" yet? G
oumaumau Sep 2018 11:17am, 27 Sep 2018 984 posts	0 oumaumau Have you considered how the fat sweaty business man is being exploited? His need or desire to see scantily clad girls is being monetised, has he not heard of the shadier parts of the internet? If as you contend there is nothing else for these girls to do to earn a 'decent' living, will banning it not just mean they will no longer earn a decent living?
Raemond Sep 2018 11:23am, 27 Sep 2018 937 posts	0 Raemond :flexes knuckles: Just so happens I did my masters thesis on human trafficking for sexual exploitation and the sex trade, particularly the arguments around whether prohibition is the best way to stop it. (as previously mentioned, stripping and topless dancing aren't the same as selling sexual services, but it covers a lot of the same ground in terms of ability to make free choices etc.) I'm super busy at the moment, and don't want to bore y'all with a long winded lecture on it, so the TL:DR version is Yes, there's been quite a lot of research on how women involved in the sex industry feel about it, whether they think they're exploited, etc. Most of it has been done by people with agendas, though, so it's all pretty contradictory. One study exclusively interviewed women who were attending a drop in centre that provided advice on how to get out of the industry - so it's not surprising they found something like 95% felt it was exploitative (if anything, it's a surprise it wasn't 100%, really). There's a lot (really, a lot) of theorising about whether commercialised sex is inherently exploitative, on the one hand the unholy alliance of second wave radical feminists that argue all penitrative sex is rape and right wing 'christians' who think any sex not for procreation is sin, and on the other third wave feminists who believe the objection to sex work but not, say, coal mining is inherently sexist and has the effect (deliberate or incidental) of limiting women's autonomy and mobility. Notably, few if any of the second wave/right wing voices are women with experience in the sector, or women from the global South (if you're not sure why that's relevant, and have a lot of time to kill, Google 'White feminism') One of few things we can say with confidence is that outlawing the buying of sex is often opposed by sex workers, as they feel it exposes them to even more risk, and there's no reliable evidence that it significantly reduces sex trafficking - there are generally no figures for levels of sex trafficking before such laws have been implemented and only very unreliable ones for levels since. So, it might. But then again it might be like the drug trade and just give more power and control to those who aren't afraid of being criminals.
HappyG(rrr) Sep 2018 11:31am, 27 Sep 2018 29,243 posts	0 HappyG(rrr) Excellent academic input Raemond. Many thanks. Unfortunately I now have to do some work (and while all labour is exploitation, it's relative, yes the bosses of this company are millionaires and I'm just a daily contract worked. But I'm not exploited, I'm privileged enough that I been given education, a stable home and money to start my life. I have no major health issues. So I have a range of have other jobs I could do. I'm choosing to do this annoying one and the only pressure to do some comes from my desire for discretionary expenditure on copious quantities of expensive cayke and toy cars) ... but please keep posting because I'd like to come back to your interesting input later. Thanks. G
Llamadance Sep 2018 11:53am, 27 Sep 2018 10,095 posts	0 Llamadance fwiw G, I tend to agree with Dvorak. My first thought on your description was that it applied to pretty much all jobs. I've no idea if there's enough regulation to make stripping etc safe, but there should be. Or maybe if the welfare system was better then some people might feel they didn't have to do it. On the other hand some people might still carry on, and I can't see there should be a problem with that.
Raemond Sep 2018 12:25pm, 27 Sep 2018 939 posts	0 Raemond With no pretentions of being backed by proper research, I also wanted to throw in my personal opinion that the clear gender imbalance between preformers (mostly female) and punters (mostly male) does strongly suggest there's something deeply unhealthy about the whole thing - probably connected with the damn patriarchy, objectification of the female form, and systematic suppression of women's education and alternative employment options. Slight tangent - there's an exhibition of renaissance nudes at the Royal academy that raised eyebrows for making a point of aiming for gender parity - begging the question (relevant to this discussion, I think) of why the male nude fell so dramatically out of favour in modern times. See graun article: theguardian.com
Dvorak Sep 2018 12:27pm, 27 Sep 2018 16,767 posts	0 Dvorak Just to go back to G's "last manifestation of the freak show" comment … You don't watch much telly, do you ?
larkim Sep 2018 12:42pm, 27 Sep 2018 5,647 posts	0 larkim I wrote a lengthy post (which disappeared into the ether) which basically said Moulin Rouge = active demand by dancers to be in that = in all probability working conditions as acceptable as any others, whereas seedy backstreet operation = may be coercive atmosphere, strong argument that there are issues needing resolution. But overall pointing out that women feel freer than ever to be topless in certain situation (e.g. beach) and men are either normalised into objectifying women OR are literally programmed that way for genetic benefit. Without knowing why, I find "attractive" women pleasing as a visual sight (in the same way that I find a nice view pleasing), and can't deny that - clothed or naked. I don't get the same pleasure in seeing "attractive" men, nor do I get that pleasure with women (or men) who I perceive as being "unattractive". I might have simply adopted societal norms, or I might be responding to some more base instinct. On balance, I've no problem with the concept of topless dance clubs (having never been near one in my life!) if working practices and coercion are in line with those you'd expect in any other job.
Weean Sep 2018 1:05pm, 27 Sep 2018 1,274 posts	0 Weean I'm ambilalent about the titty bars, but certain you (or we) are being exploited by your millionaire employers. Yes, you're educated, but you or we paid for that education which was a large part if what made you attractive to your employers in the first place, I'm sure. Oh sh*t, I'm about to turn this into the politics thread (which I long ago stopped reading as it just did my heid in). The first paragraph of my reply is supposed to be at least a little tongue-in-cheek.
HappyG(rrr) Sep 2018 1:28pm, 27 Sep 2018 29,244 posts	0 HappyG(rrr) But larks, by definition, working practices are not in line with "normal" jobs. When were you last told to take your clothes off at work?! But I completely reject the "it's just human nature / biology etc." It's biology for us to eat raw rabbits, sniff each other's bums and to kill each other with pointy sticks, but in the way in which human society has developed, we tend not to. So, no problem with choice to wear or not to wear clothes. I'm half German mate, I'm completely comfortable with walking around naked. Joking apart, for instance, in Germany, mixed changing and mixed saunas, one regularly sees naked bodies. But it's not sexual, and it's not paid for. Those are the warped aspects of this "industry". And just because more women want to work at Moulin Rouge or Folies Bergere than the local Bunny Club or whatever the one round here is called, just reflects that it's even higher paid. And no wonder, do you know how much the tickets cost. That is economically obvious and just supports my argument that it's money (aka) power talking, not "women's choice". No Dv, I don't watch "reality" telly. I read about it in the Guardian. And again, not trying to be holier than thou, but the reason I don't watch it is two-fold. 1. I don't find it entertaining. But 2. I don't want to give it my eyeballs (aka justification of popularity) and contribute to its proliferation. Weean, yeah, good point. The workers are revolting!