With mantras, sometimes I find it helpful to think not about what they mean but WHAT THEY DO and you said it -- "sex work is work" normalizes (which can be harmful when abuse and systemic oppression are involved), reduces, and obscures. We might also ask "WHO STANDS TO BENEFIT from normalizing, reducing, and obscuring the story of girls and women being bought for sexual use?" And if we accept that mantras like this are meant to stop us from thinking -- who stands to benefit from us not thinking?
And, murder-for-hire is also "work" if you assume that work is money for services rendered, regardless of the consequences for the individuals involved in that exchange and society at large. But, even if prostitution is work, so what? There are many types of services rendered for money that are immoral and even illegal (assasination, kidnapping, theft, etc), as they should be. So, the question isn't whether "sex work is work": the questions are, "Is it moral?" and "Should it be legal?" The whole "sex work IS work" mantra and framing of the question is meant to sew ambiguity and distract us from the real questions. We should NOT be distracted.
"regardless of the consequences for the individuals involved in that exchange and society at large." This is always swept under the rug. So much of this broadbrushing is being done in activists quarters. "Let's not bother engage with the complexities." (Fingers firmly place in ears.)
"The whole "sex work IS work" mantra and framing of the question is meant to sew ambiguity and distract us from the real questions. We should NOT be distracted."
YES!
I also like the analogy of criticizing companies with inhumane practices. We don't have to look that far to find exploitation happening--it can be anything from subsistence wages with no breaks to abusing workers. Exploitation is all around us. Why would it be any less of a factor here?
As a thought experiment, what would be required to ensure that "sex work" environments conform to minimal standards of workplace safety, as defined by the laws in most western jurisdictions?
Prostitution is legal in some jurisdictions in my country, and there are standards for legal prostitution. I am not familiar with those standards, but I assume they fall far, far short of any other professions that provide intimate bodily care / services. For instance, I know that licenses and strict protocols are required for haidressers and manicurists. I assume that those involved in legal prostitution don't need licenses.
And sex trafficking of women and children is work, and pimping is work, and anything that can be called "work" is therefore a respectable and ethical activity.
But the "logic" of this assertion relies entirely on the bad faith of its speaker, plus the gullibility or amorality of the hearer.
prostitution has been legal. for quite a while here in new zealand. what i have observed is that legalising it made it boom and and also got younger kids involved. over the years i have known a lot of women who have done it. both through my work and as friends. it's foul. it is not work. it is a violation.
In any case, more to the point of your post, you might be interested in this oldish book, "The £5 virgins", “an absorbing account of the sensational campaign by crusading Victorians against the ‘white slave’ traffic in Britain and continental Europe”:
Apparently the book title was precipitated by William Stead, a Victorian journalist and social reformer, according to a passage in Barbara Tuchman's "The Proud Tower", whose:
"... most notorious effort, published under the title 'The Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon', described his personal purchase of a thirteen-year-old girl for £5 as a means of dramatizing the procurement of child virgins for prostitution."
Of some interest is that the story shows up in "The Encyclopedia of Prostitution and Sex Work, Volume 1" by Melissa Ditmore. An illuminating passage:
“A first-person, expose style report on adolescent prostitution in London, it aimed and succeeded at shocking upper-class Victorian sensibilities. Stead was at the time editor of the broadsheet and conducted his investigations by posing as a potential john and intermediary. His serialized story – widely read, republished, and distributed – galvanized popular and elite support for parliamentary action to raise the age of sexual consent – legislation that had been languishing for several years.”
However, while there are no doubt many rather "unseemly" aspects to prostitution - health issues, and, even now, problems of under-age "workers" and outright slavery - one might argue that they're somewhat analogous to sweat-shops which hardly detract from the principle of an honest day's wages for an honest day's work. One thing that seems to be missing, that seems "conspicuous by its absence", is an answer to the question, as an old Globe and Mail article once put it, "Is there a moral case against prostitution?":
With mantras, sometimes I find it helpful to think not about what they mean but WHAT THEY DO and you said it -- "sex work is work" normalizes (which can be harmful when abuse and systemic oppression are involved), reduces, and obscures. We might also ask "WHO STANDS TO BENEFIT from normalizing, reducing, and obscuring the story of girls and women being bought for sexual use?" And if we accept that mantras like this are meant to stop us from thinking -- who stands to benefit from us not thinking?
Nicely stated.
And, murder-for-hire is also "work" if you assume that work is money for services rendered, regardless of the consequences for the individuals involved in that exchange and society at large. But, even if prostitution is work, so what? There are many types of services rendered for money that are immoral and even illegal (assasination, kidnapping, theft, etc), as they should be. So, the question isn't whether "sex work is work": the questions are, "Is it moral?" and "Should it be legal?" The whole "sex work IS work" mantra and framing of the question is meant to sew ambiguity and distract us from the real questions. We should NOT be distracted.
"regardless of the consequences for the individuals involved in that exchange and society at large." This is always swept under the rug. So much of this broadbrushing is being done in activists quarters. "Let's not bother engage with the complexities." (Fingers firmly place in ears.)
"The whole "sex work IS work" mantra and framing of the question is meant to sew ambiguity and distract us from the real questions. We should NOT be distracted."
YES!
I also like the analogy of criticizing companies with inhumane practices. We don't have to look that far to find exploitation happening--it can be anything from subsistence wages with no breaks to abusing workers. Exploitation is all around us. Why would it be any less of a factor here?
As a thought experiment, what would be required to ensure that "sex work" environments conform to minimal standards of workplace safety, as defined by the laws in most western jurisdictions?
Prostitution is legal in some jurisdictions in my country, and there are standards for legal prostitution. I am not familiar with those standards, but I assume they fall far, far short of any other professions that provide intimate bodily care / services. For instance, I know that licenses and strict protocols are required for haidressers and manicurists. I assume that those involved in legal prostitution don't need licenses.
And sex trafficking of women and children is work, and pimping is work, and anything that can be called "work" is therefore a respectable and ethical activity.
But the "logic" of this assertion relies entirely on the bad faith of its speaker, plus the gullibility or amorality of the hearer.
prostitution has been legal. for quite a while here in new zealand. what i have observed is that legalising it made it boom and and also got younger kids involved. over the years i have known a lot of women who have done it. both through my work and as friends. it's foul. it is not work. it is a violation.
"so often passed around in repeat-after-me tones" - indeed. Seems part and parcel of that too-common "gramaphone mind" that Orwell spoke of ... 😉
You may have run across this discussion of the topic over at "The Marginalian" by Maria Popova, but in case your other "faithful readers" missed it:
https://www.themarginalian.org/2013/08/16/the-freedom-of-the-press-george-orwell/
In any case, more to the point of your post, you might be interested in this oldish book, "The £5 virgins", “an absorbing account of the sensational campaign by crusading Victorians against the ‘white slave’ traffic in Britain and continental Europe”:
https://www.garysvintagebooks.com/product-page/the-5-virgins-by-michael-pearson
Apparently the book title was precipitated by William Stead, a Victorian journalist and social reformer, according to a passage in Barbara Tuchman's "The Proud Tower", whose:
"... most notorious effort, published under the title 'The Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon', described his personal purchase of a thirteen-year-old girl for £5 as a means of dramatizing the procurement of child virgins for prostitution."
Of some interest is that the story shows up in "The Encyclopedia of Prostitution and Sex Work, Volume 1" by Melissa Ditmore. An illuminating passage:
“A first-person, expose style report on adolescent prostitution in London, it aimed and succeeded at shocking upper-class Victorian sensibilities. Stead was at the time editor of the broadsheet and conducted his investigations by posing as a potential john and intermediary. His serialized story – widely read, republished, and distributed – galvanized popular and elite support for parliamentary action to raise the age of sexual consent – legislation that had been languishing for several years.”
https://books.google.ca/books?id=fcYq72qYRTcC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q=Stead&f=false
However, while there are no doubt many rather "unseemly" aspects to prostitution - health issues, and, even now, problems of under-age "workers" and outright slavery - one might argue that they're somewhat analogous to sweat-shops which hardly detract from the principle of an honest day's wages for an honest day's work. One thing that seems to be missing, that seems "conspicuous by its absence", is an answer to the question, as an old Globe and Mail article once put it, "Is there a moral case against prostitution?":
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/is-there-a-moral-case-against-prostitution/article19537551/