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

[Abomination]

Sort of like a woman who accuses a man of rape for brushing against her in a subway by accident, it undermines the legitimate claims of rape of women everywhere.

Yes, because that clearly happens all the time, while opposite situations (a woman being raped and keeping quiet, or a woman being raped and getting slandered and vilified in court so that her rapist can walk free) don't happen with nearly as much frequency. /sarcasm

While false claims exist and do undermine the real ones, they are a tiny minority of all rape claims, but the patriarchy wants you to believe the opposite.

Rape claims come pre-undermined.

I never said it happens ALL the time. I mentioned it DOES happen and those FEW circumstances undermine the legitimate claims of rape. The fact it does happen and the way the justice system is set up - innocent until proven guilty - is why it holds such a high concern and one case that is reported can have such severe effects on other rape claims.

Our legal system holds to the ideal that it is better a criminal get away than an innocent be punished for something they did not do. As terrible as it is for someone to be raped how terrible must it be for someone to be found guilty rape when they did not do it - either due to malice of an accuser or a mistaken identification by a victim?

Also, what is "the patriarchy"? Never met a member.

No. No, it does not, even if that were actually a thing.

I admit the 'brushing someone in a subway' is a bit of hyperbole but you can not deny there have been false accusations of rape against men that have to be taken seriously by police:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2284677/Compulsive-liar-Elizabeth-Jones-cried-rape-11-times-jailed.html

 

[Daemonate]

Of course getting a ho isn't anti-femnist.

*Being* a whore certainly is, though.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

Assuming the prostitute is doing it of her own free will, then no. Her doing it probably doesn't help the feminist movement at all, but someone simply making use of the service she's providing is neither demeaning or sexist. After all she's already demeaned herself by reducing herself to a sex toy. ...whatever.

EDIT:
I like the way Daemonate put it. Hiring a prostitute isn't anti-feminist. BEING a (female) prostitute is anti-feminist.

 

[Evil Smurf]

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.

This guy has it. Respecting a woman's right to choose stuff means you will not be demeaning to them.

 

[Darken12]

I never said it happens ALL the time. I mentioned it DOES happen and those FEW circumstances undermine the legitimate claims of rape. The fact it does happen and the way the justice system is set up - innocent until proven guilty - is why it holds such a high concern and one case that is reported can have such severe effects on other rape claims.

Our legal system holds to the ideal that it is better a criminal get away than an innocent be punished for something they did not do. As terrible as it is for someone to be raped how terrible must it be for someone to be found guilty rape when they did not do it - either due to malice of an accuser or a mistaken identification by a victim?

Also, what is "the patriarchy"? Never met a member.

If the scant few times a false rape claim is raised somehow undermine the legitimacy of the rape claim, then the ways the actual judicial system deals with those rape claims undermines them even more. As you said yourself, innocent until proven guilty, better let a rapist walk out rather than running the risk of jailing an innocent, despite the fact that false claims are less than 5% of all claims (someone put them at less than 3%, but that's nitpicking), and better let a rapist walk out if he's young, white, rich or a sports/music/movie star, because we all know that it's far worse to be accused of rape than to actually being raped, and we should always put the safety and concerns of the accused before the victim's, because fuck those lying bitches who were totally asking for it anyway. /sarcasm, in case such an atrocious sentence needed the tag.

Here, have some Feminism 101 [http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/03/21/faq-isnt-the-patriarchy-just-some-conspiracy-theory-that-blames-all-men-even-decent-men-for-womens-woes/]. They can explain patriarchy to you a lot better than I can.

EDIT:

]I admit the 'brushing someone in a subway' is a bit of hyperbole but you can not deny there have been false accusations of rape against men that have to be taken seriously by police:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2284677/Compulsive-liar-Elizabeth-Jones-cried-rape-11-times-jailed.html

So when a man does something horrible to a woman, we all say "that's just an outlier, a statistical anomaly, we're not all like him! you can't blame us all for what one lunatic does!" but when one woman does something bad, we actually expect normal women to do the same? Clearly, we need to expect more men to rape and dismember women, if that's the case. If we're going to start taking crazy seriously, we have to go all the way.

We need to go deeper.

 

[Abomination]

I never said it happens ALL the time. I mentioned it DOES happen and those FEW circumstances undermine the legitimate claims of rape. The fact it does happen and the way the justice system is set up - innocent until proven guilty - is why it holds such a high concern and one case that is reported can have such severe effects on other rape claims.

Our legal system holds to the ideal that it is better a criminal get away than an innocent be punished for something they did not do. As terrible as it is for someone to be raped how terrible must it be for someone to be found guilty rape when they did not do it - either due to malice of an accuser or a mistaken identification by a victim?

Also, what is "the patriarchy"? Never met a member.

If the scant few times a false rape claim is raised somehow undermine the legitimacy of the rape claim, then the ways the actual judicial system deals with those rape claims undermines them even more. As you said yourself, innocent until proven guilty, better let a rapist walk out rather than running the risk of jailing an innocent, despite the fact that false claims are less than 5% of all claims (someone put them at less than 3%, but that's nitpicking), and better let a rapist walk out if he's young, white, rich or a sports/music/movie star, because we all know that it's far worse to be accused of rape than to actually being raped, and we should always put the safety and concerns of the accused before the victim's, because fuck those lying bitches who were totally asking for it anyway. /sarcasm, in case such an atrocious sentence needed the tag.

Here, have some Feminism 101 [http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/03/21/faq-isnt-the-patriarchy-just-some-conspiracy-theory-that-blames-all-men-even-decent-men-for-womens-woes/]. They can explain patriarchy to you a lot better than I can.

First, that definition of patriarchy is not present here as the views are held by men who are in the exact opposite situation of a patriarch or are unaffected by one. The fear of being accused of a hideous crime is real. You said between 5% and 3% of rape claims are false? That's one in twenty. That means it could become a situation where 19 people in prison are guilty and 1 is innocent - based on the accusations of a sexual partner (or maybe they weren't even that). The accusation is just the first step to actually being convicted. Given the nature of rape and how some can boil down to "he said, she said" in court the accusation and potential incentives for a woman to accuse a man of rape must be considered. Being acccused of rape isn't worse than being raped but being convicted of rape when you did not do it would most certainly be.

The point I am trying to make though is that a woman who intentionally accuses a man of rape despite no rape actually taking place does not just harm him and the resources of the police but also the stance of legitimate rape victims.

What if that 3-5% was actually 10%? It would make convicting a rapist all the harder. "She stole my sperm and put it inside her to get me convicted!" With a 10% of rape accusations being false that would become more and more a believable defence.

Every time a woman cries wolf about rape harms other women who have been raped. The branches of feminists who call themselves feminists and embrace crazy or militaristic ideals harm the feminist movement as a whole.

The labels in rape can not be changed, the labels in feminism can.

 

[BrassButtons]

You are treating the woman's body as an object, you are not procuring a service, you are procuring using her body.

Actually you are buying a service, in addition to the use of her body. They're one and the same in this scenario (unless the person buying the prostitute wants her to play cadaver the whole time, in which case I guess it's not really a service and is just the use of the body).

But it is textbook definition of demeaning. Treating someone as an object.

That would be "objectifying", not "demeaning". Demeaning someone means causing them a loss of dignity, which may or may not be the case depending on how the prostitute feels about her work.

Of course getting a ho isn't anti-femnist.

*Being* a whore certainly is, though.

Why?

 

[Abomination]

So when a man does something horrible to a woman, we all say "that's just an outlier, a statistical anomaly, we're not all like him! you can't blame us all for what one lunatic does!" but when one woman does something bad, we actually expect normal women to do the same? Clearly, we need to expect more men to rape and dismember women, if that's the case. If we're going to start taking crazy seriously, we have to go all the way.

Your attempts at humour are unwelcome and pointless. I am not stating this because I think it SHOULD happen I am simply stating that it DOES happen.

The more times another woman actually makes a false rape claim the more often a defence lawyer will accuse a legitimate woman of making up her rape claim and make the court an even worse experience. The more often a rape victim hears about false accusations of rape and how defence lawyers use those statistics to give rape victims in court a terrible time the less likely she will be to actually report a rape.

I am not saying this is a good thing, I'm drawing a parallel as to how one part of a group can tar the whole by their actions since they share the same name: female accusers of rape and feminists.

I can't believe I have to clarify this part, normally I wouldn't have to but I know how this board can be: I am not calling feminists the same as people who falsely accuse people of rape. I am saying there are feminists who do help their cause and there are feminists who do not help their cause due to holding militant or seriously unreasonable views. Just as there are rape victims who do deserve justice and there are "rape victims" who have accused a man of rape that never happened in order to harm him. The latter of both groups harm the cause of the former of both groups. Yet everyone in the first group identifies themselves as a "feminist" and everyone in the latter group is identified as a "rape victim".

 

[Lazy Kitty]

Depends.
Do you see buying bread from a baker as demeaning to bakers?

It's probably more demeaning to yourself, as you're admitting you're not good enough to get anyone to love you.

Just like buying bread from a baker is like admitting you can't bake bread yourself (or just don't have time for it).

 

[J Tyran]

As a concept no, sex workers are simply service providers. When it involves human trafficking, pandering/pimping/procuring or because of social reasons like drug addiction (self inflicted, being tricked or forced into it is different) or poverty its another matter completely apart from sexism.

Human trafficking for instance, to the gangs involved sex slavery is a highly profitable part of their business but only a part. They make just as much money if not more out of desperate people in general and many get subjected to general slavery and do manual or repetitive labour instead, some even get forced into acting as pawns in other criminal activities and forced to produce or sell drugs, carry out burglaries and robberies and work in pickpocketing gangs. A huge variety of crime in fact, they take all the risk and leave their masters with all of the rewards and their hands clean.

They exploit vulnerable and desperate people, gender and discrimination have nothing to do with it. People are treated as animals and they choose how to put them to work according to their merits, a strong man will end up cockle picking, and older women would be forced into tending a cannabis farm and the attractive men and women will be used as sex slaves.

The last part annoys me slightly too, there has a been growing bruhah about the young women being forced into this and more resources are going into finding and rescuing them. Almost nothing is being publicly said about the male sex slaves.

 

[Darken12]

First, that definition of patriarchy is not present here as the views are held by men who are in the exact opposite situation of a patriarch or are unaffected by one. The fear of being accused of a hideous crime is real. You said between 5% and 3% of rape claims are false? That's one in twenty. That means it could become a situation where 19 people in prison are guilty and 1 is innocent - based on the accusations of a sexual partner (or maybe they weren't even that). The accusation is just the first step to actually being convicted. Given the nature of rape and how some can boil down to "he said, she said" in court the accusation and potential incentives for a woman to accuse a man of rape must be considered. Being acccused of rape isn't worse than being raped but being convicted of rape when you did not do it would most certainly be.

Firstly, if you think that the patriarchs aren't in power because they created (and ensured it endured) a system of social values that placed them in their place, you are quite naive. Just because there are no patriarchs here doesn't mean we're not all perpetuating the values they passed down (and which keep them in their positions of power). No men is unaffected by the patriarchy, just like no woman is. The patriarchy has benefited so much because it has contributed to creating the most appropriate society for themselves, and they wouldn't be able to retain their power for long if they didn't have a society backing them up.

Secondly, what. No, seriously, what. Being falsely convicted of rape would be worse than being raped? No. Flat out no. Unless you're raped in prison, in which case you would be right because only rape can be as bad as rape. But the odds of that happening are absolutely null, since the tendency already exists to let rapists walk free. When it comes to "he said, she said" the odds are overwhelmingly in the accused's favour. There have been rapists walking out scot free with forensic evidence and witnesses for crying out loud, so if a woman falsely accuses a man of being raped and will be obviously unable to provide concrete evidence to support her claims (and will at best only be able to fabricate circumstantial evidence), the dude is always going to walk free. I would bet any sum of money that the only time an innocent man has been actually convicted by a rape he didn't commit was because someone very powerful made it so through the use of money, political pressure, blackmail and so on. And it almost certainly never happened in America.

The point I am trying to make though is that a woman who intentionally accuses a man of rape despite no rape actually taking place does not just harm him and the resources of the police but also the stance of legitimate rape victims.

By that logic, every time a man actually raped a woman, it would be hurting not only hurts the victim and her entire life, but it also supports the assertion that all men are automatic rapists. Not potential rapists (which is a reasonable assumption), but automatic rapists (which is absolutely illogical).

What if that 3-5% was actually 10%? It would make convicting a rapist all the harder. "She stole my sperm and put it inside her to get me convicted!" With a 10% of rape accusations being false that would become more and more a believable defence.

Rapists have repeatedly got the "sperm in her" thing dismissed by acknowledging they had had consensual sex before (as either boyfriends, husbands or one-night-stands). Or, you know, by convincing the judge/jury that no rape took place at all and therefore that sperm is evidence of consensual sex.

The justice system is biased in favour of the rapist. We already had a thread like this one a few days ago, and I posted a lot of news articles about rapists walking away scot free despite tons of forensic and testimonial evidence against them.

Every time a woman cries wolf about rape harms other women who have been raped. The branches of feminists who call themselves feminists and embrace crazy or militaristic ideals harm the feminist movement as a whole.

The labels in rape can not be changed, the labels in feminism can.

Like I said before, if we're going to be taking that statement seriously, then every single time a rape takes place, I want men to start accepting they're all natural rapists and submit for chemical castration. I'll be the first in line, even.

Maybe THAT will finally shut up the MRAs.

Your attempts at humour are unwelcome and pointless. I am not stating this because I think it SHOULD happen I am simply stating that it DOES happen.

The more times another woman actually makes a false rape claim the more often a defence lawyer will accuse a legitimate woman of making up her rape claim and make the court an even worse experience. The more often a rape victim hears about false accusations of rape and how defence lawyers use those statistics to give rape victims in court a terrible time the less likely she will be to actually report a rape.

I am not saying this is a good thing, I'm drawing a parallel as to how one part of a group can tar the whole by their actions since they share the same name: female accusers of rape and feminists.

I can't believe I have to clarify this part, normally I wouldn't have to but I know how this board can be: I am not calling feminists the same as people who falsely accuse people of rape. I am saying there are feminists who do help their cause and there are feminists who do not help their cause due to holding militant or seriously unreasonable views. Just as there are rape victims who do deserve justice and there are "rape victims" who have accused a man of rape that never happened in order to harm him. The latter of both groups harm the cause of the former of both groups. Yet everyone in the first group identifies themselves as a "feminist" and everyone in the latter group is identified as a "rape victim".

You know what else happens? Actual rape. And you know what else happens after that, in an incredibly high frequency? The rapist sees no punishment for his actions.

I get your point. What you're not getting is that your argument is a double-bladed sword, and all I need to do is to tip it over and it cuts right back in the opposite direction. Case in point: using rapists to tarnish the entirety of men. Don't we repeat ad nauseaum that it's oh so unfair of those evil misandrists to paint us all with the same brush and make awful generalisations whenever an asshole does something horrible? Why aren't we applying the same rhetoric here? Why is it that when women do this, it impacts the whole group, but when men do that, then it's evil and badwrong to say they impact the whole group?

So like I said, let's be consistent on this, shall we? Either the actions of a few tarnish the entirety of the group (in which case, all men please proceed to the nearest prison for pre-emptive jail time for the imminent rape you will undoubtedly commit) or we accept that the actions of a few aren't representative of the group as a whole, particularly when those actions are harmful (and therefore women who falsely accuse others of rape should not change anyone's opinion about any rape accusations made afterwards).

Depends.
Do you see buying bread from a baker as demeaning to bakers?

It's probably more demeaning to yourself, as you're admitting you're not good enough to get anyone to love you.

Just like buying bread from a baker is like admitting you can't bake bread yourself (or just don't have time for it).

I don't know, I don't often see children being kidnapped to be raised as bakers, or bread-buyers beating the shit out of bakers when the bread isn't baked to specifications (or just because the bread-buyers feel like it), nor I see bakers exploited by bread mafias, living in terrible conditions with very little freedom, or considered lower in social status than any other job.

Might make buying bread a whole lot grayer if all that was true, wouldn't it?

 

[J Tyran]

falsely convicted of rape would be worse than being raped? No. Flat out no.

It can be, depending on what country the victim of the false accusation lives in. Getting deprived of freedom for ten or fifteen years is bad but not as bad as being raped, in a nation with a humane prison system anyway. Getting denied freedom for 15 years in the US prison system is probably getting as close to rape as you can get. Getting slammed into a South/Central American or East Asian jail or any other hell hole like that is probably worse than rape and something you might come out of, its effectively a death sentence.

Rapists suffer in jail due to the nature of their crime, both guards and inmates victimize them and guards will turn a blind eye or even outright allow other inmates to do so. It is amazing how many rapists get accidentally placed inside unsupervised holding areas and things, their food gets contaminated with bodily fluids and beatings and rapes are to be expected as well as witnessing horrific murders and violent assaults. No more than they deserve arguably but not something an innocent man should face. Rapes last minutes or hours and the victim is traumatized for life, spending 15 years in jail like that and being traumatized for life is as bad. Different but as bad.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Maybe this is the old fuddy duddy prude in me, but I'm really not a fan of prostitution. I'm sure there's a handful of weirdos who are practicing it of their own free will, but you can't tell me the majority isn't forced into it due to desperation or slavery.

 

[Abomination]

Firstly, if you think that the patriarchs aren't in power because they created (and ensured it endured) a system of social values that placed them in their place, you are quite naive. Just because there are no patriarchs here doesn't mean we're not all perpetuating the values they passed down (and which keep them in their positions of power). No men is unaffected by the patriarchy, just like no woman is. The patriarchy has benefited so much because it has contributed to creating the most appropriate society for themselves, and they wouldn't be able to retain their power for long if they didn't have a society backing them up.

I do not deny the fact that old white men control so much of the world's wealth and therefore power but the nature of the legal system's "beyond reasonable doubt" of guilt is there to PROTECT people against false accusation - men and women alike. That isn't some great big patriarch conspiracy.

Secondly, what. No, seriously, what. Being falsely convicted of rape would be worse than being raped? No. Flat out no. Unless you're raped in prison, in which case you would be right because only rape can be as bad as rape.

I would rather be raped than be convicted on a rape I did not commit. For having been raped can be a private thing that would affect me as much as I allow it to. Being CONVICTED of rape, being sent to prison (and all the joys THAT brings) and then being a convicted criminal for the rest of my life and all the joys that brings someone seeking employment all for something I didn't do? Yeah, I'll take the night of rape thanks. Your mileage may vary but I would prefer something that might be shit for a day but certainly beats years of shit for as long as I can see.

By that logic, every time a man actually raped a woman, it would be hurting not only hurts the victim and her entire life, but it also supports the assertion that all men are automatic rapists. Not potential rapists (which is a reasonable assumption), but automatic rapists (which is absolutely illogical).

You're right at the end that it's illogical - at least in your case. A RAPE ACCUSER is a far smaller minority than half of the world's population and they exist in a fairly unique circumstance compared to most people. Not every man is a rapist, we know that. Not every rapist is a man. Not every rape accuser is sincere in their accusations. We are dealing with the fear of EXCEPTIONS and they must be investigated. There's no reason to investigate every man for rape because a case of rape hasn't been reported against every man. Every man can POTENTIALLY be a rapist and that's why an accused goes to trial. However there is POTENTIAL that the woman accusing a man of rape is doing it just to get him in trouble and that is what needs investigating.

Your comparison holds no water as it requires an event to transpire.

What if that 3-5% was actually 10%? It would make convicting a rapist all the harder. "She stole my sperm and put it inside her to get me convicted!" With a 10% of rape accusations being false that would become more and more a believable defence.

Rapists have repeatedly got the "sperm in her" thing dismissed by acknowledging they had had consensual sex before (as either boyfriends, husbands or one-night-stands). Or, you know, by convincing the judge/jury that no rape took place at all and therefore that sperm is evidence of consensual sex.

The justice system is biased in favour of the rapist.

No. It is biased in favour of the ACCUSED. In EVERY case and EVERY crime. No matter what. This isn't about getting rapists off Scott-free, this is about preventing people from being convicted for a crime they didn't commit.

Why aren't we applying the same rhetoric here? Why is it that when women do this, it impacts the whole group, but when men do that, then it's evil and badwrong to say they impact the whole group?

It has NOTHING to do with their gender. Why you thought it was the only time this type of thing happens is beyond me.

Almost every group is demonised for the actions of some of them. We already have mentioned Christians. Not every one of them wants to see gay marriage prevented but since those who call themselves Christians do it then all Christians are considered to probably do it.

It is a scenario, not a default state of being.

 

[A.A.K]

I don't think so, and I don't care all that much either.
If you're selling yourself, you're up for sale. Don't give a shit whether it's demeaning or not - You've made the move.

 

[Dragoon]

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.

Pretty much the same as my opinion, as long as it's their choice I don't see a problem and the same applies to male prostitutes, singling out women is kind of demeaning to both.

 

[Thaluikhain]

And just as a side note, Feminism is really more about equality between all people, which is why you often see feminists groups go to town on racists or ableists, as well as misogynists.

I very strongly disagree there. Yes, there are feminists who are aware of intersectionality, but there are very many that don't.

Go to (for example) any "womanist" site, and read what they think about feminists and race issues.

 

[Spinozaad]

No.

Also, why this white teenage gamer obsession with feminism and sexism? Did I miss the memo that stated that The Escapist is now part of the Sisterhood?

 

[JemothSkarii]

And just as a side note, Feminism is really more about equality between all people, which is why you often see feminists groups go to town on racists or ableists, as well as misogynists.

I very strongly disagree there. Yes, there are feminists who are aware of intersectionality, but there are very many that don't.

Go to (for example) any "womanist" site, and read what they think about feminists and race issues.

I thought it was pronounced 'womyn' (since there should be no 'man' in there)? Or is it something different?