Health & Morality:
Workers in every fast food and other restaurants that saturate Americans with heart-clogging, diabetes inducing fat-laden sugar-coated processed food. These workers contribute to the immoral degradation of the health of the majority of Americans.
All minimum wage earners because they are exploited by companies that value only maximized profits. Many minimum wage earners because they are exploited in their capacity as minors, minorities, or illegal aliens. Exploitation:
Professional football players and boxers, a substantial proportion of whom are predictably physically debilitated and crippled and eventually are left without adequate medical and financial resources by companies that value only maximized profits
As I work on moving sex worker rights forward in the US, this forum can be a very occasional place to initially float talking points which may be useful. A kind of "focus group", if you will.
I have been hearing far too much "happy hooker" talk from sex workers fighting for their rights. The problem with this is that it lets the other side frame the debate. You do not have to prove that sex work is a "good job" to justify claiming your right to be decriminalized. You only have to show that sex work is not substantially worse than many jobs which are legal, and there are some really shitty legal jobs. If the issue is safety, for example, there are many unsafe legal jobs, including for example jobs in forestry and commercial fishing, but we do not criminalize those jobs because they are unsafe.
In any debate, the side which successfully frames the debate is already halfway toward winning. When some real negative aspect of sex work is pointed to by the other side of the sex worker rights debate, the response should not be to deny that their claims are ever true, because this response plays into their hands by making it seem as if we have to prove something that we do not have to prove. Instead, the first response should be whether the same standards are being applied to other jobs, and whether those jobs are criminalized as a result.
Brainstorming now on this: What are some other areas, other than safety, where there is a "double standard" applied to sex work? Can you think of any?
why are you qualified to tell them how to respond to any questions or comments?? Every lady has her own feelings about the subject.
But I agree that there are many sex workers who have no desire to gain rights, and there are even more clients who have no interest in seeing sex workers gain rights.
I am speaking only to those people who do have an interest in seeing the decriminalization of sex work in the US.
Ah, the intellectual leading the revolt on behalf of the peasants.
Hardly. I have met several sex workers who are much brighter than me.
So what are the additional areas in which double-standards exist?
He finally makes a worthwhile post and all he gets is abuse.
SOMEBODY has to lead the charge if the draconian laws criminalizing otherwise lawful conduct between consenting adults, lawful in every way except for money being put into the equation.
I would think that everyone on this board would get behind an effort to end the incarceration of our friends for doing something that almost everyone of us does on a regular basis.
The anti prostitution people are quite organized and by getting the public on board with the sensationalism of "human trafficking" are winning the battle of public opinion. I mean they have even gotten many of the hookers and johns right here on TER to buy into their bullshit. I agree the the debate needs to be reframed or it's going to get worse, not better.
Can you be a bit more specific? Human rights 'leaders' are a dime a dozen, and it feels like everyone and his dog believes he can 'influence law'. Who the fuck are you really other than some bullshit kid pretending to be a big shot on a topic that few legislators even care about and no decent constitutional lawyer would spend more than 12 seconds considering.
I don't agree with your statement that few legislators care about this, certainly some do, if simply for the fact that if it were yet another legal industry it could be taxed then the government would have more funds, but they are afraid of their constituents. Plus I'm sure they care about it since they also partake in the industry.
And decent constitutional lawyers would care about it, they just have to be compensated. Constitutional lawyers in other countries give a crap, we are no different.
As is any personal service business.
It is the "duty" of each person to accurately report the income they earn. But like many other "legal" industries, some choose to ignore the obligation(s) to report the income and file tax returns.
And some of those lawyers and legislators are in that fold...as in not reporting or filing.
And decent constitutional lawyers would care about it, they just have to be compensated. Constitutional lawyers in other countries give a crap, we are no different.
It's just like finding out that there is no Santa Claus. lol
But seems like most are fucking hookers as well 
I keep pouring over the docs on ACA and am determined to find the language that fucking hookers is a medical deduction. I'll keep you posted LOL
From everything I have been able to discern, since my current medical expenses are a big fat zero, AND they now have to take you even with preexisting conditions, I don't see any reason in the world to buy health insurance until the penalty exceeds the cost of insurance itself.
So in the meantime I will "self insure" and any minor health issues that come up, if any, i will simply pay for out of pocket. If I do come down with some major illness costing tens or hundreds of thousands, I will buy insurance AFTER the fact, Hey, I didn't make the rules, but I can damn sure take advantage of them.
Health & Morality:
Workers in every fast food and other restaurants that saturate Americans with heart-clogging, diabetes inducing fat-laden sugar-coated processed food. These workers contribute to the immoral degradation of the health of the majority of Americans.
Exploitation:
All minimum wage earners because they are exploited by companies that value only maximized profits. Many minimum wage earners because they are exploited in their capacity as minors, minorities, or illegal aliens.
Exploitation:
Professional football players and boxers, a substantial proportion of whom are predictably physically debilitated and crippled and eventually are left without adequate medical and financial resources by companies that value only maximized profits
Professional athletes often suffer lifelong debilitating injuries.
not only because they help kill Americans but because they disproportionately kill minorities. Also because fruit and candy flavored cigarettes are intentionally targeted at young people to get them hooked.
Alcohol beverage manufacturing workers because increasingly fruit and candy flavored beverages are intentionally targeted at young people to get them hooked.
Cellphone manufacturing workers because automobile drivers using cellphones are becoming the biggest threat on the nation's roads.
Sorry, but I don't buy your examples.
People in the fast food industry serve the food they do because people like it. Nothing more, nothing less. If people liked salads and tofu burgers, that's what McDonalds would serve.
Minimum wage laws have nothing to do with "exploitation". Do you know who lobbied for minimum wage laws, and who benefits the most? Unions. Minimum wage laws keep wages artificially inflated. They also keep low-skilled workers out of good-paying jobs the unions control. Prior to 1960, blacks had a lower unemployment rate than did whites. It was because they would take jobs that white people wouldn't, if they needed the money. Some money was better than none. When minimum wage laws were enacted, black unemployment rose, as employers had to choose between paying a black person or a white person the same wage for the same job. Sad, but that's the way it was.
There was a time (except for the Great Depression) when you could get a job if you needed a job. It might not be the best job, and it might not pay the best, but it was a job.
Raising the minimum wage simply results in the wages of other jobs being raised, which results in higher prices. And everybody is back to square one.
As for your comparisons to the sex industry, those are valid. The sex industry is no more or less dangerous to workers or the public than many, if not most, other jobs.
As passionate about sex worker rights as I am (I'm the one who posted as my first thread a run-around post about whether men would participate in a fund raiser that would benefit a sex worker organization), I don't think the reason for sex work being illegal lies in the superficial reasons given by the "other" side, double standards of safety and exploitation. The biggest reason is a puritanical view by a few that sex work is morally corrupt, because it goes against monogamy. And it's very hard to think of another legal industry that goes against such a well established standard of morality - except maybe abortion and look how much that's contested even after all these years.
As pessimistic as this sounds, the most successful way to change the framing of the debate is with money, with organizations that can be powerful enough to hire lobbyists that can make an impact. With intelligent and driven men and women who can frame the lobbyists arguments and let them do the debating. However, we lack this, we lack fortified organizations with clear goals, as well as supporters who are willing to make donations even if they are anonymous. Otherwise, the argument is reduced to the same as the legalizing weed argument, "you're a pothead".
I won't say I have years of research behind me, but even in a couple of months trying to become involved in helping this movement has been tiresome. In my experience, it is fragmented and poorly funded, and allows others to make up stupid statistics that equate involvement in sex work (both on hobbyists and provider sides) with human trafficking, low moral standards and subpar education levels.
It's very angering.
is the drivel posted on this thread by some of the previous contributors. If you don't really have a thoughtful addition to the discussion, how hard can it be to just go away? Why do you find it necessary to demean those with whom you do not agree? If you don't agree, please construct a logical, well reasoned reply that presents an opposing view. If all you can do is ask "who the fuck are you?" couldn't you just say no to the keyboard? Or go start another thread about something else? Grow the fuck up.
Decriminalization is a goal that can be achieved, but not without a lot of work. And certainly, there will be setbacks and frustrations along the way. Personally, I think the movement's path may be similar to that of the LGBT Rights movement, despite the obvious differences.
Fragmented? I am told that in the early days of the LGBT movement, gay men and lesbians rarely worked together, despite their common goals. And, of course, LGBT started as LG, and only after time added the B and T.
The path to decriminalization is likely, at least initially, to go through the courts rather than through legislatures, based on rights claims, as happened with the LGBT movement.
The equating of commercial sex which involves only consenting adults with the trafficking of minors is being successfully sold to the public by those in the Rescue Industry, and most be countered. To help with this, Sex Worker Rights advocates must take a clear stand against the trafficking of minors. And. as I have said, "coming out" to as many people as you feel comfortable with is a powerful way to fight inaccurate stereotypes, although no one should ever do something they are not completely prepared to do.
I agree that it is primarily moral panic that has led to anti-prostitution laws, but the courts are increasingly inclined to find that the enforcement of morality through criminal laws, when not supported by other non-moralistic goals, is not permissible.
As pessimistic as this sounds, the most successful way to change the framing of the debate is with money, with organizations that can be powerful enough to hire lobbyists that can make an impact. With intelligent and driven men and women who can frame the lobbyists arguments and let them do the debating. However, we lack this, we lack fortified organizations with clear goals, as well as supporters who are willing to make donations even if they are anonymous. Otherwise, the argument is reduced to the same as the legalizing weed argument, "you're a pothead".
I won't say I have years of research behind me, but even in a couple of months trying to become involved in helping this movement has been tiresome. In my experience, it is fragmented and poorly funded, and allows others to make up stupid statistics that equate involvement in sex work (both on hobbyists and provider sides) with human trafficking, low moral standards and subpar education levels.
It's very angering.
Anyone can be legally paid to perform sexual services. Unless those sexual services are provided directly to the person who's paying for them.
Then it's morally bankrupt....lol..
It should be noted that sex-workers would be far more safe if the perp knew that he (or she) could face the onslaught of the law if they were to abuse the sex-worker; and the sex-worker knew that they could call on LE to protect them from the abuser.
Thanks Madiba for waging the good fight.