Is sex work immoral? How can something be immoral if everyone is a consenting adult?

Is sex work immoral? How can something be immoral if everyone is a consenting adult?

>as long as everyone consents, it isn't bad
This is your brain on Democracy. No concept of a higher good or justice beyond the majority consensus of windowlickers.

Prostitution is necessary for society. It's the oldest profession in the world, and is definitely a net gain. Petty, moralizing, Abrahamic religion is the only reason it's so vilified in the modern world.

Then what higher good does sex offend?

>Prostitution is necessary for society.
Is it though?

of course its not LOL

Prostitution controlled by men that is. Also make it illegal to marry a prostitute or even reproduce with one.

sex *work* is the key here

ignoring the spread of disease and other basic health concerns, it does to things:
leaves sex as merely an avenue of entertainment which means that you are propagating a society of sugar and porn and other material pleasures, at the cost of bondship between partners.

>ignore the spread of disease and other basic health concerns

This has never been an issue in any other profession and workers either do so at their own risk or are regulated to make sure risk is minimized. Legalizing and regulating would mean safer sex for people who are doing it anyway.

>b-but muh sacred act
Are you Augustus? This is pure autism. People have always and will always seek meaningless sex and gratification.

>People have always and will always seek meaningless sex and gratification.
that doesn't make it good. disposition to hedonism is not a praise of hedonism or a demonstration of it's value.
a society should not celebrate it's dissolution at the cost of it's absolution. sex is something between a mated pair, with promiscuity comes a breakdown of what is valued in a person.

>Legalizing and regulating would mean safer sex for people who are doing it anyway.

we need to legalize heroin and cocaine so pharma companies can get it to consumers safer and cheaper. Also we can tax the shit out of people's misery.

> People have always and will always seek meaningless sex and gratification.

dumb fallacious argument

Lurk on /adv/. More than a few believe any premarital sex is immoral, consensual or not.

>calling prostitution "sex work"
>calling comic books "graphic novels"
>calling blacks "people of color"
What's the reason for this faggotry?

it's not "meaningless sex gratification". Men need sex, you can only go so long without it. Men who are poor/low-income have less access to marriage because women tend to marry up. These men either marry late or never marry at all. they still need sex once in a while. also sometimes you need variety, your wife isnt always enough especially if she's old and fat now. it isn't out and out hedonism to seek other sources of sex once in a while. that's called moderation. only having sex with your fat ugly old wife is another form of extremism on the opposite end of being really promiscuous. the middle way is having sex with prostitutes once in a while in order to take care of your sexual needs in a moderate fashion. that ain't hedonism anymore than having a meal at a restaurant once in a while instead of eating only at home is hedonism

>muh Christian "morals"

One of these are not like the other, brainlet.

It enables really ugly people to get laid.

Which one?

> Men need sex, you can only go so long without it.

You are confusing 'want' with 'need'. You need water to live. You won't die without sex.

Ugly people not getting laid is solely a 20th century Western/Japanese phenomenon. Everywhere else ugly people are still breeding like crazy.

Suicide is a type of death.

there are needs whose lack of fulfillment doesn't lead to death. it isn't an on-off switch of need-want. there are degrees of needs. sex isn't as high up as breathing or eating or sleeping, but it's still a need.

Our correct system of open courtship combined with monogamy is the best system.

Most people still get mates, but there's still a eugenic pressure against the truly hopeless.

Besides that, fat people deserve to be unhappy.

It's not immoral, but women should give up sex without men having to pay for it tqbh.

I mean, even giving money or things to your girlfriend and she accepting it is basically prostitution.

Women deciding who gets to fuck is unironically slavery.

>Suicide is a type of death.

It is, but it also a form of weakness and self pity (exceptions for terminal illness/warfare/etc). Read, meditate, get control of both your mind and body and you won't be suicidal (and as an added benefit you will be considerably more sexually desirable to your partner of choice).

That said I support sex work, but I also support shaming women who choose it.

It is if you think preventing the social dysfunction caused by sexual frustration is worthwhile. I do and so do a lot of other people. Tedious prudes do not.

Well I'm pro-suicide and anti-prostitution. Extramarital sex should be criminalized.

>Men need sex, you can only go so long without it
no you don't you soylent incel.
there is little that is needed physically in order to keep your body on living.
if you ascribe material wants and other physical gain to be NEEDED in order to have a life worth living, you're a fucking joke of no greater will than that of a lesser ape like an orangutan.

I'm not a christian

>It is if you think preventing the social dysfunction caused by sexual frustration is worthwhile.

>sexual frustration caused by feminism and atheism

>lets fix it by going deeper into the feminist and atheist hole and normalizing prostitution.

>>fat people deserve to be unhappy.
Why are you wishing unhappiness on yourself user? Besides that obvious insult, this is just barely disguised and tedious moralizing on your part.

>>compares paying for sex with recreational use of heroin and then starts talking about fallacious arguments.
lol

Do you actually bother to read the things you type before you post them?

>>>fat people deserve to be unhappy.
>Why are you wishing unhappiness on yourself user?

>n-no u
lmfao this is the death throes of an "argument"

t. not even that guy

>it's lack doesn't kill you = you don't need it
the a faulty premise. needs have degrees. some (like breathing, eating, sleeping) are high up because without them you die. others like sex are still needs but not as urgent as the former.

>sexual frustration caused by feminism and atheism
Nope. Caused by the fact that some men can't get it any other way regardless. I see no reason why they should have to worry about being arrested for the mere act of paying for sexual services.

>lets fix it by going deeper into the feminist and atheist hole and normalizing prostitution.
Prostitution is already normalized genius. The only thing keeping it illegal does is to keep police departments from focusing on more serious crimes.

that's a faulty premise*

The first part of that post wasn't an argument and I admitted as such, I just couldn't resist the obvious insult.

Any system of logic is dependent on axioms that exist outside of that system.

You can't define the morality of any situation without first creating a subjective preference for what morality is.

I just don't like fat people. Any moral judgements I make will be based off of this axiom, which does not derive from any broader philosophical system.

This thread made me think I was on /r9k/ for a moment

Yeah like I said, tedious moralizing. I don't like faggots who want to have people put in jail for trivial bullshit simply because they don't like some of the people who do the trivial thing in question.

You either don't know what "unironically" means or you don't know what slavery is.

value is something that is ascribed by an individual.
you "need" sex because you value sex. i can get all into my Stoic philosophy, but what's really at play here is that because you want something so desperately, you ascribed value to it, and because you value it that highly, you now "need" it.
it's in your power, it's a product of your will, that you manufactured this situation. worse, it's purely corporeal. it's a physical pleasure, and you value physical pleasure enough that you are willing to knock virtue down a peg in society in order to get at this pleasure.

>trivial
society demands law and order in the pursuit of justice.
justice is arrived at through discourse.
perhaps it is not so trivial, but rather that one thing is wrong and one thing is right, and others through tainted perception challenge these notions wrongly.

>>blah blah maslow's heirarchy of needs is bullshit compared to endlessly reading and jacking off to dumb greek philosophers.
"virtue" is subjective and I say that paying for sex does not demonstrate a lack of this subjective quality.

having sex with prostitutes is not unvirtuous. physical pleasures in moderation are a need. society isnt knocked down a peg by allowing prostitution, its brought up a peg. prostitution is healthy for society.

>>society demands law and order in the pursuit of justice.
No. Society actually demands that activities which disrupt commerce and daily business in general be kept to minimum. This is why murder and armed robbery are so heavily penalized and parking tickets are not.

>>justice is arrived at through discourse.
The discourse around prostitution has been first prudish christian propaganda and now prudish sex-negative feminist propaganda.

>>perhaps it is not so trivial, but rather that one thing is wrong and one thing is right, and others through tainted perception challenge these notions wrongly.
There is nothing wrong with paying for sex much like there is nothing wrong with paying for food or drink.

>some dude analyzes what a bunch of windowlickers need to feel good when they act as little more than apes, compared to wise men throughout the ancient world who took these windowlickers and showed them why they are stupid
virtue was arrived at by impartial discourse while hedonists like yourself are guided by little more than feelings.

>society isnt knocked down a peg by allowing prostitution, its brought up a peg. prostitution is healthy for society.

What is your reasoning behind this? I've never lived in a society with legal prostitution before. What is different/better?

Nothing is immoral if you're tolerant enough.

There are many secular reasons to discourage prostitution
-slow the spread of STDs
-encourage people to seek meaningful bonds built on mutual respect rather than just pay for instant gratification
-the potential for worker abuse is extreme
-vice industries can negatively impact property values and lead to children being exposed to sexuality prematurely
-becomes a type of workfare for struggling single moms.

The potential for abuses in the system would require heavy regulation: to make it a profession that someone gets into like they get into any other profession, and not just something poor struggling women turn too because they have no other means of supporting their families. You would want to follow Nevada’s lead in regulating men out of the industry entirely, and make it so that you go to bunny ranches which are left low key and off the beaten path, to a place owned and managed by women, where the workers can get tested regularly for disease.

>physical pleasures in moderation are a need
why?

>prudish christian propaganda and now prudish sex-negative feminist propaganda
societies racked with ascribed value to hedonism were lamented long before Christ walked the earth. I'm not a Christian.
Feminists are all sex-work positive, because it;s "their body, their right". Just more notions of what they "deserve" and "need" at the low bar of what makes them feel good.

>>impartial discourse
ahah
No. No such thing exists.

Mainly, you can go an hire a prostitute without being worried about being bothered by the cops about it.

Nations with legal prostitution largely avoid most of these problems.

>>The potential for abuses in the system would require heavy regulation: to make it a profession that someone gets into like they get into any other profession, and not just something poor struggling women turn too because they have no other means of supporting their families.
A certain number of poor women will always become prostitutes because they prefer being payed for sex over other forms of low-skill labor.

>>You would want to follow Nevada’s lead in regulating men out of the industry entirely,
I dunno much about this, but I fail to see why a man running an escort service is necessarily a problem in and of itself.

>>and make it so that you go to bunny ranches which are left low key and off the beaten path, to a place owned and managed by women, where the workers can get tested regularly for disease.
"Adult Escort" services are already low-key. So are "massage" parlors. Getting tested for disease is something that nations with legal prostitution already require.

>Feminists are all sex-work positive, because it;s "their body, their right". Just more notions of what they "deserve" and "need" at the low bar of what makes them feel good.
You don’t know feminists. They are torn on the issue, many are opposed to sex work for the simple fact that desperate women can be drawn into it even against their wishes if they feel like it is their only means of providing for their children, and that they fear a system where the pimps are allowed to get away with abusing their workers

>>societies racked with ascribed value to hedonism were lamented long before Christ walked the earth. I'm not a Christian.
I don't consider paying for sex to be a vice, so this is irrelevant.

>>Feminists are all sex-work positive, because it;s "their body, their right".
Some are like that, and they are correct to think this way.

Just more notions of what they "deserve" and "need" at the bar of what allows them to live the life they wish to live.
Tedious moralizing removed. No need to thank me.

I don't think it should be illegal, but I do think it's immoral.

>Nations with legal prostitution largely avoid most of these problems.
Because they regulate the shit out of it
>but I fail to see why a man running an escort service is necessarily a problem in and of itself
In a perfect world it wouldn’t be, but in the one we live in you want to avoid opportunities for men to manipulate women into the sex trade.

>low key
Yeah, because in most places you don’t want to broadly announce your intent to profit off of illicit behavior.

>Mainly, you can go an hire a prostitute without being worried about being bothered by the cops about it.

Can you expand on this? I mean what are the differences on a macro-societal level? Are the differences between say a country like Germany (legal) and the US (mostly illegal) really that profound at the societal level (not political/economic/etc)?

>What is your reasoning behind this? I've never lived in a society with legal prostitution before. What is different/better?
people can take care of their needs without being stigmatized/prosecuted
poor/working class men are happier because their physical needs are met

You should be stigmatized you spineless mong. Capitalizing on the misfortunes of women unable to make themselves productive in an actual line of work and keep their bodies and spirits respected so you can get your rocks off is a terrible thing. That's an actual reduction of a women's value, and her having to make that difficult choice and job does not improve the value of it. There is none whatsoever.

>sexual frustration caused by feminism and atheism
I think sexual frustration predates both those concepts by a tad.

Besides, puritanical religions breed sexual frustration like nothing else - just ask little Timmy.

>I respect women

"women" don't exist as some homogeneous category with identical needs and desires. some women want to do that kind of work, and even have a pride in it. not all women are the same. if you really want your mind blown go on Quora and look up posts made by women in the "sex work" industry

You assume that women who sell sex cannot be respectable. This is because of puritan propaganda of both christian and secular varieties.

Well one major difference is that Germany has less unhappy sexually frustrated people walking around. Which means that Germany is going to be somewhat more pleasant by default then the US is.

>>Because they regulate the shit out of it
I am not opposed to business having to abide by labor laws and regulations so I dunno what you're getting at here. I just see no reason why prostitution should be discouraged. If women want to pursue that work, they should be allowed to, if men want to pay them for their services that should also be allowed.

>You assume that women who sell sex cannot be respectable. This is because of puritan propaganda of both christian and secular varieties.

Why do you people think that the opinions/values of others are only formed by propaganda, but your own opinions are some sort of organic creation? Everyone is influenced by outside factors, be those cultural/religious/parental/etc to some extent. You are no better or worse than him, because you have been influenced by a different sort of "propaganda" and ended up a different "product".

Yes. Just not for trying to be men.

>"women" don't exist as some homogeneous category with identical needs and desires

Wrong answer. They do in fact have a general swathe of emotions, and you may find this hard to believe, but integrity.

>some women want to do that kind of work, and even have a pride in it

Nope. Yes my claim is that not one single woman wants to do that work. They do it because it's easy and the alternatives are hard. Because we have politicians that swindled them into thinking that the labor force they should be working in needs more competition from migrants and from outsourcing to overseas. The ones I knew that did it only did it because they had no where else to go at the time. One started because she thought it would be fun and she didn't need that much cash so she could get by with a small clientele basis, but soon realized she hated it since it devalued the fundamental value of what she thought was ideal(sexual relationship itself had lost meaning, had become over saturated and quickly stale) and she craved the kind of feeling she could get with a romantic partner, which lead to her making horrible partnering choices until she got wise about everything(amazingly, rare case that happens).

>You assume that women who sell sex cannot be respectable

There is no assumption here. There is nothing respectable about being physically dominated by complete strangers and their perversions so one can make grocery money.

considering how phenomenally stupid you obviously are, i fail to see any reason to continue any kind of discussion with you

>Yes.
Stopped reading there.

I never said my opinions were perfect. Or anything about my own opinions at all. That said, my opinion that prostitution should be legal is based on the idea that consenting adults should allowed to buy or sell sex as they deem fit. I.E it's about personal liberty. Not about jacking off about some nonsensical construct of virtue conjured up by people who wrongly think that greek philosophers didn't like little boy thighs as much as the rest of the greeks did.

>>There is no assumption here. There is nothing respectable about being physically dominated by complete strangers and their perversions so one can make grocery money.
lol physically dominated, you are fucking retarded.

Do yourself a favor and go hire a whore, and ask her how much extra she charges for bdsm play.

Same fagging with no arguments.

>Do yourself a favor and go hire a whore, and ask her how much extra she charges for bdsm play.

And then have a heartfelt discussion about where she really wants to be in life reflecting all the while on what went wrong. Just because she has to do it doesn't mean she really wants to. And it certainly doesn't mean there's any moral value in it just because there's money in it. I can think of more than a few things that rake in money but are absolutely immoral.

>I never said my opinions were perfect. Or anything about my own opinions at all.

Ah yes, the old "I'm just asking questions" defense. Strong one that is.

>prostitution should be legal is based on the idea that consenting adults should allowed to buy or sell sex ...it's about personal liberty.
And that is a valid argument, but not everyone wants to live in a society where the individual out weighs the collective. That "liberty model" if you will, of running a society is hardly the one, if anything it is the exception.


>Not about jacking off about some nonsensical construct of virtue conjured up by people who wrongly think that greek philosophers didn't like little boy thighs as much as the rest of the greeks did.

Weak.

The point which you are blithely ignoring is most of the time men who pay for sex are not really interested in the fucked up shit. The rest of your post is both subjective moralizing combined with the smug self-assurance that a woman couldn't possibly be happy working at job you personally think is "beneath" her. White Knighting is fucking pathetic.

>le everyone who calls me a nigger must be a samefag
Kill yourself cuntcuck. There's nothing lower on Earth than your kind.

>>And that is a valid argument, but not everyone wants to live in a society where the individual out weighs the collective. That "liberty model" if you will, of running a society is hardly the one, if anything it is the exception.
Except even more authoritarian societies sometimes have legal whores too. It's not just about liberty, but also about what is and is not worth the time for law enforcement. One of the reasons why I can pay for sex with relative little worry where I live is because the cops have other more serious issues to deal with.

>>weak
It was an absolutely accurate and effective slam. You only say it's weak because you don't like what it implies about the people you idolize.

>sex isn't a vice

>The point which you are blithely ignoring is most of the time men who pay for sex are not really interested in the fucked up shit

I'm not even trying to go hard here, but men not caring only makes the occupation less valuable, objectively. Nobody wants to work in a field where they aren't cared for or valued. You just helped prove my point.

>The rest of your post is both subjective moralizing combined with the smug self-assurance that a woman couldn't possibly be happy working at job you personally think is "beneath" her.

A)It's objective
B)It's based in shared human moral value, which you can denounce but still be subject to.
C)"Smug,self assurance" is just your emotional filling of what an argument with me would look like in person and has no bearing on the argument itself and a misrepresentation of justified conviction.
D)I've met women who have been hookers, strippers, and one BDSM worker. None of them felt "good" about it. I do feel confident that my childhood notions of right and wrong were completely validated by real world experience. It's apparent that you lack this, along with any real arguments.

>White Knighting

FFS at least google. No way you're older than 20.

All sex workers are prostitutes, all graphic novels are comic books, but not all people of color are black.

>Except even more authoritarian societies sometimes have legal whores too.
You are conflating authoritarianism with acting in the best interest of the collective. Authoritarian regimes often occur in those types of societies, but the two concepts aren't necessarily connected.


>It's not just about liberty, but also about what is and is not worth the time for law enforcement.

That is a fair argument in its own right, but you are shifting the goalposts.

>One of the reasons why I can pay for sex with relative little worry where I live is because the cops have other more serious issues to deal with.

Anecdotal and irrelevant.

>It was an absolutely accurate and effective slam. You only say it's weak because you don't like what it implies about the people you idolize.

Lol. You think the Greeks were sexual prudes? Come on man. Read a book, literally any book about Greek history/society.

/r9k/ pls go.

>>I'm not even trying to go hard here, but men not caring only makes the occupation less valuable, objectively. Nobody wants to work in a field where they aren't cared for or valued. You just helped prove my point.
That's not what I said at all. I said men aren't largely interested in the fucked up shit, not that they aren't interested in paying for sex in general. Oh and a lot of prostitutes straight up won't do the really rough stuff.

>>muh subjective experiences talking with a small number of prostitutes totally justifies my infantile moralizing.
lol you're a faggot.

>>no way you're older then 20
I'm 31 years old, you white knight fagdong. Keep rescuing them damsels you little bitch, maybe one of them will actually reward you with sex one day!

>>That is a fair argument in its own right, but you are shifting the goalposts.
Really? I'm not trying to, I was only adding something I forgot to mention in the first post you quoted.

>>Lol. You think the Greeks were sexual prudes? Come on man. Read a book, literally any book about Greek history/society.
I was actually slamming some of their fanboys on here.

most of this post is meant forobviously

>I-IT'S NOT THE FAULT OF THOSE POOR GURLZ THAT THEY SUCK COCK FOR MONEY
>being such a good boyim omega cuntcuck that you'll end up defending literal whores