Poll: Is soliciting a prostitute an anti-feminist act/demeaning to women?

[Sparrow]

A friend and I were discussing this and we weren't really able to come to much of an agreement on a number of points. Is the act of soliciting a prostitute demeaning to just the prostitute, women in general or no-one? And alternatively, is it sexist if the gender roles are reversed i.e. a woman buying a male prostitute?

I'm generally curious about what people think, opposed to whether or not I believe my argument to be correct or incorrect, so feel free to answer truthfully. Any further explanation of your answer would be good too.

 

[Vegosiux]

As long as the prostitute is in it of her own accord and she has full control over who she has sex with, paying her for sex is not an act that is "demeaning to women".

Now, pimping and forcing women into prostitution, that's a crime and one should at least be slapped around a bit with a large trout for it.

Also, I like (making) a good understatement.

 

[Daystar Clarion]

Really?

We're seriously still fucking doing this on these forums?

*sigh*

No, it is not demeaning if the woman sells sex of her own free will, it's a service like any other and is legal in many countries.

 

[Sonofadiddly]

It really depends on the situation. Hiring a prostitute who is forced into prostitution through human trafficking or because she is financially destitute and has no choice in the matter is a problem. In both these cases, having sex for money is not the woman's choice and is therefore not just demeaning but highly damaging to the woman.

However, if a woman actually had a choice in the matter and decided to become a prostitute because she wanted to, then no, it's not anti-feminist. It's up to you to be responsible and ensure that the woman is a prostitute by choice.

 

[Sparrow]

Really?

We're seriously still fucking doing this on these forums?

*sigh*

No, it is not demeaning if the woman sells sex of her own free will, it's a service like any other and is legal in many countries.

You know, these feminism threads always veer off-topic and get locked because beople can't be nice to eachother.
With that in mind:

What's with this mentality that we can't have a straightforward discussion about this? I don't understand your need to outline how much of an issue you think it'll be. It's not constructive in any way.

Ironically, you're taking this off topic. At least give it five seconds before you declare this thread a mess. I'm genuinely interested in what people have to say, I'm not trying to prove a point either way.

 

[Lucem712]

Uhh, well, if the prostitute is a willing participant in the lifestyle and having you as her/his client, than it isn't demeaning in anyway. (IMO)

It isn't really demeaning to either sex, in a general sense. Human beings have needs and if there's a need, someone will try and fill it.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

Why would it be demeaning if she's doing it out of her own accord?

 

[Dryk]

As others have said it really depends on who the prostitute is and why they're having sex for money.

 

[Shadowstar38]

Would it be demeaning to men if it were a male hooker? No? Okay then. You have your answer.

 

[klaynexas3]

You know, these feminism threads always veer off-topic and get locked because beople can't be nice to eachother.
With that in mind:

My picture has to do with women, so technically it derails and stays on topic at the same time. God I've been on 4chan too long.

OT: If anything, it'd be demeaning to the man, as he can only get laid if he pays. He's just not that good in bed clearly, and not interesting enough to make a girl enjoy his personality to make it a decent time. Sad really.

But in all seriousness, if a woman of her free will decides to use her body as a means of making money, then go ahead. Isn't the feminist movement all about letting women do as they please, giving them more rights, etc etc? Doesn't that just seem back-asswards(I said what I said) to say that all women have to act like a single stereotype to be able to achieve these rights of "freedom"? I don't know, that's just me.

 

[hazabaza1]

It's a service and really should be legal concerning both sexes.
So no.

 

[bananafishtoday]

Soliciting a prostitute isn't demeaning, but mistreating, objectifying, or disrespecting them because of their job is. More broadly, it's not demeaning to be a prostitute (or any other form of sex worker.)

There's a debate to be had about sex work in general, but this really isn't the place to have it.

 

[Colour Scientist]

It really depends on the situation. Hiring a prostitute who is forced into prostitution through human trafficking or because she is financially destitute and has no choice in the matter is a problem. In both these cases, having sex for money is not the woman's choice and is therefore not just demeaning but highly damaging to the woman.

However, if a woman actually had a choice in the matter and decided to become a prostitute because she wanted to, then no, it's not anti-feminist. It's up to you to be responsible and ensure that the woman is a prostitute by choice.

Agreed.

Now, if I can escort you all into another thread, away from this topic.
Please keep you arms and legs inside the distraction vehicle at all times.

 

[Sparrow]

It really depends on the situation. Hiring a prostitute who is forced into prostitution through human trafficking or because she is financially destitute and has no choice in the matter is a problem. In both these cases, having sex for money is not the woman's choice and is therefore not just demeaning but highly damaging to the woman.

However, if a woman actually had a choice in the matter and decided to become a prostitute because she wanted to, then no, it's not anti-feminist. It's up to you to be responsible and ensure that the woman is a prostitute by choice.

Agreed.

Now, if I can escort you all into another thread, away from this topic.
Please keep you arms and legs inside the distraction vehicle at all times.

I made a previous comment about this, but I'll do it again anyway: please stop making comments like this. I'm sure we can have a normal conversation about this. There's no reason to demean the topic, we can all be adults here. Stop assuming this is going to spiral into a battle of nazi-feminism vs male rights activists.

 

[Colour Scientist]

It really depends on the situation. Hiring a prostitute who is forced into prostitution through human trafficking or because she is financially destitute and has no choice in the matter is a problem. In both these cases, having sex for money is not the woman's choice and is therefore not just demeaning but highly damaging to the woman.

However, if a woman actually had a choice in the matter and decided to become a prostitute because she wanted to, then no, it's not anti-feminist. It's up to you to be responsible and ensure that the woman is a prostitute by choice.

Agreed.

Now, if I can escort you all into another thread, away from this topic.
Please keep you arms and legs inside the distraction vehicle at all times.

I made a previous comment about this, but I'll do it again anyway: please stop making comments like this. I'm sure we can have a normal conversation about this. There's no reason to demean the topic, we can all be adults here. Stop assuming this is going to spiral into a battle of nazi-feminism vs male rights activists.

Sorry, I know it's shit when people try to dismiss your threads but similar topics have been all over these forums lately. I think everyone's a little fatigued and needs so more uplifting subject matter.

It's a shame we don't normally have nice conversations about these topics but, for the moment, that's just how the escapist is.

 

[Eddie the head]

At this point I don't fucking care. If it's there choice I can't imagine why, but then you could say society want's them to be one so that makes it sexist. Then there is a rebuttal to that and so on and so forth. And I can't be bothered to care, at this point someone could say I'm racist and sexiest for finding that black girl at work attractive.

 

[BathorysGraveland2]

No, no way in hell. As long as the prostitute is over the legal age and is doing it on his/her own free will, then there is nothing wrong with it and any law that prevents it is fucking stupid, in my opinion. It's about time people (not individuals, just people as a whole) understand that sex isn't some demonic terrible thing that need to have so many tight laws dictating what is and isn't acceptable (within reason, things like rape and pre-pubescent sex should never be acceptable for obvious reasons).

Edit: Oh, and for the record. I agree with you OP about that stupid fucking spiderman bullshit. Or anyone trying to hijack another thread with similar shit. Have a bit of goddamn respect or make your own spiderman thread.

 

[Darken12]

In an ideal world, it wouldn't be an anti-feminist act, because the profession wouldn't have social baggage, there would be an even gender ratio, the workers would have the same health and safety benefits present in other professions (and would never be underage), it would be regulated by strict labour laws, and it would be a violence and coercion free act between two consenting people.

We don't like in an ideal world.

 

[MysticToast]

As long as a women is consenting, nothing is demeaning to women as a whole.

 

[DefunctTheory]

You know, these feminism threads always veer off-topic and get locked because beople can't be nice to eachother.
With that in mind:

Spider-Man? Come on, keep that crap in 4chan.

As for the original question... paying a prostitute for sex is not sexist. Offering money to random (not prostitute) women for sex probably is though.