General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: What are the main reasons men pay for sex? [View all]BainsBane
(53,035 posts)Last edited Mon Aug 25, 2014, 11:31 AM - Edit history (2)
What you and your friends insist on is maintaining a view of the world where no one but men who buy count. I've made an effort to communicate with you in good faith. Clearly that was wasted effort. What I have talked about is not terribly complicated. It's simply a question of whether one sees an issue as entirely about himself and others with privilege or one thinks other human beings in society affected by prostitution matter. If any of you have any experience with the sex trade, you have to know that underage prostitution is common, indeed the norm. You've been pointed to information by people with experience living and working on the streets. those are real lives, real sex workers. http://www.democraticunderground.com/125548981 Only "suckers' fall for it. I think what you mean to say is only suckers care about someone besides themselves.
Defining prostitution as entirely about the male consumer promotes a view of the world that promotes privilege and consumption above human lives. It willfully and hostility seeks to banish from public discourse everyone else because in a neoliberal ethos, only money and those who possess it hold value. To ensure that narrow view of capitalism means excluded the majority of humanity affected by that commerce. To even consider their existence is for "suckers."
Neoliberalism requires ignoring the reality of the commerce they hold above human rights. Just as mining companies ignore environmental toxins that cause cancer and American manufacturers ignore the deaths than result from the harsh labor conditions in their factories abroad. They do so because they see those lives as meaningless. That is precisely what is happening here. You all are outraged that I dare mention anyone besides the men who consume. How dare I talk about actual sex workers and communities affected by prostitution? How dare I suggest anyone besides men of means have any significance? What is going on here is a classic justification of profit over social justice. Some of you think that because it's about sex means somehow typical concerns of social justice and community consequences shouldn't matter. Others are consistent in that they always promote the exploitation of the many for the benefit of the few, as long as they are on the side of the few.
Nothing I have said is factually inaccurate, and you provide no evidence to refute it. What you refer to as "suckers" are people who care about someone besides just themselves, who care about social justice. Some people care about profit and privilege and some human rights. David Koch and Mitt Romney consider those of us who care about social justice suckers as well. Capital and its defenders always do.