Yes, this is correct. Only two things I would add: first, recognizing that those who sell sex are almost always victims does not mean we should have a positive attitude toward buyers of sex. Quite the opposite, in fact. I would actually argue that anyone who has ever paid a prostitute (of any gender) for sex should be excluded from a communist organization; OnlyFans is maybe a bit different, since it’s all online and porn use is so accepted in our society, but I would certainly be very wary of anybody in a leadership position who was bought “services” on it. It’s all a form of rent seeking, but with the rented commodity being an actual human being, and the “want” satisified being in no way neccesary to human life or human flourishing in the way that (say) housing is. So with the level of brutal exploitation in the industry, a principled Marxist has no reason to support it.
(For clarity, I don’t think you were saying anything different, but in my experience it’s good to make the point explicitly, because libs like to twist support for sex workers around into “visiting the red light district is AKSHUALLY a revolutionary act, and buying feet pics is just like reading Lenin!1!1!” We want to raise the productive forces and increase overall prosperity, so that everybody can work and support themselves, and nobody is forced to sell their body in order to put food on the table. In the meantime we can help sex workers through mutual aid, etc. Sex need never enter into the equation.)
The second thing is very minor, and feel completely free to disagree – but I’m always bothered somewhat by the term “normalize,” as it feels very idealistic. Things don’t get “normalized” or accepted without some change in the underlying economic relations. So I don’t think the normalization of sex work is good in and of itself; it’s a symptom of some unhealthy cause, not people waking up one day and deciding to be less prudish. We’re all a little prey to the liberal notion of social change, that it’s precipitated by what Stefan Molyneux (remember him? what a bozo) called “magic individuals” who step up and “change the discourse.” It might be good to avoid their language altogether.
Thanks for the clarification, which I fully agree with- buying sex is not some “revolutionary” or “liberating” act.
That said, as for the second thing, I think I’d have to disagree, ultimately. Societal ills exist- hell, they continue to exist even in every AES that has risen up so far, and will always be a work in progress until a truly complete socialism is built (and even then, truth is humans are humans… fingers crossed, but people are complicated beings and I don’t see that going away). Until we have some perfectly utopian society- if that is possible- (a better society that is always improving however, is undeniably possible- hence why we’re both communists) there’s good reason to believe sex work will exist in some increasingly minuscule form even under AES- and the truth is, it will not be the failings of the individual (sex worker, that is)- but it will be the failings of the socialist society thus far (of course, as no system is “perfect”- but communism presents the path forwards, and of course I believe that) which will need to be attended to, that lead to this inevitability.
The act of purchasing sex should not be normalized; sure. But the truth is, the societal consequences and stigma have almost always been brunt by the “industry’s” victims, the sex workers themselves- and these stigmas play a significant role in keeping many of them within the work to begin with, or forcing them into more dangerous, disenfranchised, maligned circumstances.
It’s not a matter of prudishness as I see it- but a matter of human decency, that the stigmas against sex workers should be combated. Perhaps “normalization” is not the most effective way to go about this- hell if I know- but I definitely think that any disdain and othering of sex workers- and all other lumpenproletariat- is a reactionary cultural belief in and of itself that should be worked against and ultimately purged. I suppose to be specific, I think that the “normalization” of sex workers is absolutely necessary; as for sex work itself and the sex “industry”- that’s another matter, though at some point it becomes hard to cleanly divide the two when it comes to normalization.
Maybe I should avoid the language of “normalization” as you say. The end goal however is simple- sex workers and all lumpenproletariat should be destigmatized and integrated into society- (perhaps the words destigmatization and integration would work better)- both for decency’s sake, but also because these stigmas and marginalization play a large role in why they remain in such circumstances.
Yes, this is correct. Only two things I would add: first, recognizing that those who sell sex are almost always victims does not mean we should have a positive attitude toward buyers of sex. Quite the opposite, in fact. I would actually argue that anyone who has ever paid a prostitute (of any gender) for sex should be excluded from a communist organization; OnlyFans is maybe a bit different, since it’s all online and porn use is so accepted in our society, but I would certainly be very wary of anybody in a leadership position who was bought “services” on it. It’s all a form of rent seeking, but with the rented commodity being an actual human being, and the “want” satisified being in no way neccesary to human life or human flourishing in the way that (say) housing is. So with the level of brutal exploitation in the industry, a principled Marxist has no reason to support it.
(For clarity, I don’t think you were saying anything different, but in my experience it’s good to make the point explicitly, because libs like to twist support for sex workers around into “visiting the red light district is AKSHUALLY a revolutionary act, and buying feet pics is just like reading Lenin!1!1!” We want to raise the productive forces and increase overall prosperity, so that everybody can work and support themselves, and nobody is forced to sell their body in order to put food on the table. In the meantime we can help sex workers through mutual aid, etc. Sex need never enter into the equation.)
The second thing is very minor, and feel completely free to disagree – but I’m always bothered somewhat by the term “normalize,” as it feels very idealistic. Things don’t get “normalized” or accepted without some change in the underlying economic relations. So I don’t think the normalization of sex work is good in and of itself; it’s a symptom of some unhealthy cause, not people waking up one day and deciding to be less prudish. We’re all a little prey to the liberal notion of social change, that it’s precipitated by what Stefan Molyneux (remember him? what a bozo) called “magic individuals” who step up and “change the discourse.” It might be good to avoid their language altogether.
Thanks for the clarification, which I fully agree with- buying sex is not some “revolutionary” or “liberating” act.
That said, as for the second thing, I think I’d have to disagree, ultimately. Societal ills exist- hell, they continue to exist even in every AES that has risen up so far, and will always be a work in progress until a truly complete socialism is built (and even then, truth is humans are humans… fingers crossed, but people are complicated beings and I don’t see that going away). Until we have some perfectly utopian society- if that is possible- (a better society that is always improving however, is undeniably possible- hence why we’re both communists) there’s good reason to believe sex work will exist in some increasingly minuscule form even under AES- and the truth is, it will not be the failings of the individual (sex worker, that is)- but it will be the failings of the socialist society thus far (of course, as no system is “perfect”- but communism presents the path forwards, and of course I believe that) which will need to be attended to, that lead to this inevitability.
The act of purchasing sex should not be normalized; sure. But the truth is, the societal consequences and stigma have almost always been brunt by the “industry’s” victims, the sex workers themselves- and these stigmas play a significant role in keeping many of them within the work to begin with, or forcing them into more dangerous, disenfranchised, maligned circumstances.
It’s not a matter of prudishness as I see it- but a matter of human decency, that the stigmas against sex workers should be combated. Perhaps “normalization” is not the most effective way to go about this- hell if I know- but I definitely think that any disdain and othering of sex workers- and all other lumpenproletariat- is a reactionary cultural belief in and of itself that should be worked against and ultimately purged. I suppose to be specific, I think that the “normalization” of sex workers is absolutely necessary; as for sex work itself and the sex “industry”- that’s another matter, though at some point it becomes hard to cleanly divide the two when it comes to normalization.
Maybe I should avoid the language of “normalization” as you say. The end goal however is simple- sex workers and all lumpenproletariat should be destigmatized and integrated into society- (perhaps the words destigmatization and integration would work better)- both for decency’s sake, but also because these stigmas and marginalization play a large role in why they remain in such circumstances.