Politics

10176 readers

16 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.

Guidelines for submissions:

Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

Socialism

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

Sex Work: Last Week Tonight with John Oliver (www.youtube.com)

submitted 2 years ago by graphito to c/politics

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] kvjxq 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

how weird it is that doing sex for money on camera generally is seen as distinct from doing sex for money off camera, even though that's effectively an arbitrary legal and moral distinction to make. you can't even point to an obvious difference between the two that justifies the distinction

This is just obtuse - sex on camera isn't done for the gratification of the participants. None of the people engaged in the sexual act is paying to get off.

[–] alyaza 4 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This is just obtuse - sex on camera isn’t done for the gratification of the participants.

...have you talked to any person who has sex on camera? i would venture to guess that at least a supermajority of them do it at least partially for the reasons you describe. i'm also pretty sure most people do not or would not find "getting paid to have sex on camera" an undesirable profession to have.

[–] kvjxq 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I like how you conveniently ignored the second sentence in my comment.

[–] alyaza 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I like how you conveniently ignored the second sentence in my comment.

yes: because it's wrong, unless you think absolutely nobody pays for porn (and that most people don't accordingly do porn because they are being paid to engage in an on-camera sexual behavior). you are making a distinction in the causal actions that lead to the creation of most on-camera sexual acts and the causal actions that lead to most sex work being done, when there practically isn't one. both are being done as a voluntary exchange of services and/or goods between consenting people.

[–] kvjxq 1 points 2 years ago

Again - you're being deliberately obtuse. I'm not going to converse with someone who is so determined to ignore my substantive point.

[–] remington 1 points 2 years ago

None of the people engaged in the sexual act is paying to get off.

That's the second sentence that you are referring to, right?

Please, reiterate the point you are trying to make.

load more comments (1 replies)