Thinking about this because of a greentext I saw earlier complaining about OF models.

It feels like a lot of the stigma surrounding sex work in the modern day (that doesn’t just boil down to misogyny/gender norms/religion) is based on the fact that selling intimate aspects of one’s self places a set value on something that many see as sacred; something that shouldn’t have monetary value.

Not to say anything about the economic validity of a society without currency, but I think that, hypothetically, if that were to exist, sex work would be less stigmatized since this would no longer be a factor. Those engaged in sex work would be more likely to be seen as doing it because it’s something they are good at/enjoy, and less because it’s an “easy” way to make money, as some think. It would also eliminate the fear of placing set value on social, non sex-work related intimacy (not that those fears were well-founded to begin with).

1 point

places a set value on something that many see as sacred; something that shouldn’t have monetary value.

I’d say it’s the other way around - because it’s labor that is (mostly) being performed by women (or stigmatized as something “only women do”) it’s considered to be of no value whatsoever. How many women do you know that performs work such as housekeeping, child-rearing and/or marital sex essentially at own cost because this type of labor carries no monetary exchange value in our society?

I’d say sex work falls into that category - but it gets stigmatized because sex work can actually allow women to escape such labor and not be locked into literally playing housewife to the capitalist mode of production (ie, wiping a company man’s arrse so that he can concentrate on making capitalists richer).

permalink
report
reply
20 points

If you get paid for it you are a whore, if you do it as a hobby you are a slut.

The stigma is there, regardless of the money aspect. They will just use a different word.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Well, this is the weirdest shit I’ve ever read.

permalink
report
reply
19 points

There will always be exhibitionists and people who just like to fuck, but sex work is, by definition, transactional. You’re not going to see a society with free communal whores who aren’t being compensated in any way.

permalink
report
reply
-3 points

I was more thinking any and all forms if sex work, however you want to transpose their equivalents in a post-scarcity society.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

You’re just delusional.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points

transactional

I prefer “tit for tat”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Huh? Are you just talking about like a girlfriend?

permalink
report
reply
1 point

not all people deflate (traditional) intimate relationships into communistic sex work.

difference is you can operate a sex-for-everyone-booth or have sex with someone you deeply trust, know and care about (gf).

(i also hope that you don’t assume the readers are all heterosexual men, because then you would have much bigger problems with your gender politics)

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I don’t think unpaid public sex slaves exist, they always pick their mates.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Showerthoughts

!showerthoughts@lemmy.world

Create post

A “Showerthought” is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you’re doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The best ones are thoughts that many people can relate to and they find something funny or interesting in regular stuff.

Rules

  • All posts must be showerthoughts
  • The entire showerthought must be in the title
  • Posts must be original/unique
  • Be good to others - no bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia
  • Adhere to Lemmy’s Code of Conduct

Community stats

  • 5.4K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.1K

    Posts

  • 39K

    Comments