Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am thinking rationally. It isn't empowering. It's demeaning. It's saying, hey I want to buy your vagina for awhile. And then in the next breath turnaround and tell girls #metoo, you are MORE than YOUR VAGINA. Unless you want to sell it. So if you can get someone to pay for it, well it's not demeaning at all.
So if money is involved, it makes it empowering. If money is not involved, #metoo, cue the virtue signaling and lawsuits.
So which is it?
Capitalism is the most empowering thing ever devised by mankind. It raises people out of poverty and gives them autonomy over their lives.
Quote:
A husband is not paying for sex. The husband and wife have an agreement via voluntary monogamous sex.
You're kidding, right? How much did homeboy have to pay for the ring? How much did he have to spend on dates while he was dating her, especially since it is common knowledge that sex stops after a few years of marriage for most couples?
Quote:
And yes the customer gets what he is buying. So in that moment, no, you do NOT own your body. The other person is rendering services FROM you. Via your body parts. Pretty logical to me, no emotion involved.
If I own a restaurant, the people who are dining there do NOT own it at that moment. They were invited consensually.
Quote:
Would you encourage 12 year olds to get into this line of work? Suggest books they can read about it, videos they can watch and then explain it to them?
This is all based on emotion because you hold sexuality to a different standard. .... its ok.. nothing wrong with that. but that's not a standard that is shared by everyone. Again, when you work for someone or do a service for someone, you aren't owned by that person. Repeating it doesn't make it any more correct.
Labor laws prevent indentured even willing indentured servitude. Legally it falls under many state's "At Will" employment laws that an employee can quit at anytime and an employer can fire for any reason. Contracts must be drawn up with a time limit... it cannot be indefinitely and provisions to break it (even with penalties) must be present.
There is no ownership of persons here. You cannot legally write a contract willing away your freedoms and civil rights to a person.
Labor laws also prevent minors under a certain age (16 typically) from working. So your comment about 12 year olds are irrelevant.
In the two decades I have been involved not one person has ever posed a credible and logical reason for differentiating sex from labor.
A Definition of labor:
human activity that provides the goods or services in an economy
So tell me is sex not a human activity? If not then what is it and why is it any different from any other type of human activity?
i highly doubt that. You most likely dismiss every argument as emotional. Just like you are doing here.
I knew someone who sold panties. Their ads regularly got removed from Craigslist so they got clever. They’d word it as “used clothing, pants, ties, needs washing”. People Will get around the logistics
"Hey party in area 420.. just bring along a couple Bennys. I have Molly already here ready to have some fun. For those shy Russians, I speak Russian and love pearls."
Disclaimer.. the above is fictitious story and just an example of how difficult it would be for any website to simply automatically filter out possible illegal content without the ability to determine context. Yup.. that's it... my intentions. lol
i highly doubt that. You most likely dismiss every argument as emotional. Just like you are doing here.
Give it a shot. When you use words like "demeaning" it is emotional... not everyone has the same definition. Or when you conjure up some husband wife story or some sap story about a minor... all emotional. God forbid you start quoting the bible.
capitalism is the most empowering thing ever devised by mankind. It raises people out of poverty and gives them autonomy over their lives.
You're kidding, right? How much did homeboy have to pay for the ring? How much did he have to spend on dates while he was dating her, especially since it is common knowledge that sex stops after a few years of marriage for most couples? so only people who exchange an expensive ring can get married? If there is no ring it makes the sex invalid? Or makes the marriage invalid? What's your point?
if i own a restaurant, the people who are dining there do not own it at that moment. They were invited consensually.
they are not there to own the restaurant. But they own the food and can do with it as they will. They can demand it anyway they want, and can eat it anyway they want. Once the food is brought to the table, the restaurant no longer owns it.
12 year-olds can't give consent.
true. But they are generally exposed to a lot of what career do you want? Information. So why not expose them to this great career choice and get them trained?
Bottom line is that if you believe that a person owns their own body then they should have the right to do with that body as they wish as long as it does not hurt someone else..
If you believe that the state has a right to limit what a person does with their own body that doesn't harm anyone else....
Then you believe that your body is owned by the state.
they are not there to own the restaurant. But they own the food and can do with it as they will. They can demand it anyway they want, and can eat it anyway they want. Once the food is brought to the table, the restaurant no longer owns it.
End of argument. The issue discussed here is labor not work product. Labor and restaurant isn't owned by the customers at any time.... you said it yourself.
As such, selling a service or product doesn't mean the labor (in this case sex work) results in the ownership of said individual. Existing labor laws won't allow it.
so only people who exchange an expensive ring can get married? If there is no ring it makes the sex invalid? Or makes the marriage invalid? What's your point?
It doesn't have to be expensive. And I'm not just talking about a ring.
It's perfectly fine for people to hook up after the guy pays for a dinner date, but if he tries to cut out the middle man and just pay to hook up, all of a sudden the State gets involved and it is somehow "demeaning."
Quote:
they are not there to own the restaurant. But they own the food and can do with it as they will. They can demand it anyway they want, and can eat it anyway they want. Once the food is brought to the table, the restaurant no longer owns it.
I'm not talking about the food. I'm talking about the restaurant as PROPERTY. Customers are consensually occupying the owner's property temporarily. No different than prostitution.
Quote:
true. But they are generally exposed to a lot of what career do you want? Information. So why not expose them to this great career choice and get them trained?
Not my business. How many kids end up following the career path their parents dream of anyway?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
