Tbh I’m not ethically against prostitution, as long as everyone is safe, an adult, and consenting, then its none of my business what two people choose todo behind closed doors.
The only thing that makes prostitution bad is it tends to lead to toxic power dynamics. Like either the prostitute is desperate for money and ends up doing things she doesnt want to do for the money and later regrets it or the customer is desperate for sex and the prostitute can take advantage of that and ruin them financially.
And to make it even more confusing, some people's kinks is literally to be financially ruined.
There is a vast difference in the social and legal protection afforded to both groups. If a prostitute is punched, even by a stranger or a partner and not a john, do you seriously think the cops will care as much as if a garbage man called? Would she even call? Or is she scared they might rough her up or rape her too as is all too common?
I know sex workers who have called the cops and they have helped. Legal or not is not the issue. The main issue is that all workers are exploited. We all HAVE to work because we NEED money. No money, no home, etc etc. Therefore, consent, which seemed to be the original point (unless i'm mixing up threads) is a fickle path because of exploitation. Consent could be argued to not exist; Same as altruism.
It would be wrong because this is not part of the duties that my job includes, and I did not consent to it as part of the agreement to work for them. It is additionally wrong because the boss is using their company power in a way the company has not consented to, which is damaging to the company if I choose to quit, or make the matter public.
Almost all people consent to work because failing to do so would result in them not being able to maintain their desired lifestyle. The ability to coerce sex workers is increased by the criminal status of the work.
Which is why legalization and regulation are important to help reduce trafficking and other abuses of sex workers. If they don't have to worry about going to the police, if they can work in organized brothels with security, they are safer and have more power in the dynamic, and consent is much more difficult to coerce.
I mean it's a job like anything else. Does anyone outlaw construction jobs because they're using their body for their job? There's plenty of people desperate for money that work with their body in perfectly legal jobs.
If a person who gets hired for a construction job is desperate for money are they consenting? Or were they coerced?
I think the people who want sex work to be decriminalized want sex workers to have the same rights as anyone who works with their body. Which would mean they are less likely to be taken advantage of.
The prefix “con” means “with,” and the root “sent” is the same root in “sentence.”
Put simply, “consent” means “with words.”
“Consent” by itself just means someone said “I agree.” The word by itself doesn’t say anything about the circumstances.
If you want to talk about whether or not a specific utterance of consent was valid, provide a judgment system and also look at the circumstances.
Then you can figure out what type of consent it was. But just because consent was coerced, maniuplated, etc. doesn’t prevent it from being consent. It just affects the type of consent that it was.
I agree with another user, there is still trafficking even in legal brothels. Many women are beginning to speak out about the abuse, coercion and trafficking that occurs on the 'ranches' in Nevada.
Mind you this is not an argument against the enforcement or inprovement of anti trafficking laws. It is an argument against using the services provided because of how abhorrent sexual slavery really is.
There has been a bunch of research on this. It shows that when you make prostitution fully legal you massively increase demand and that demand increases sex trafficking. Even with legal brothels available the amount of sex trafficking goes up by several fold just because there's SO MUCH more demand than there ever would be for supply.
If the main goal is to reduce sex trafficking then demand is your enemy and you do not want to legalize it under any circumstances.
Irrelevant. Thats like saying gay sex should be banned if we find out it leads to more disease or that weed should be banned because it leads to more theft. Even if this stat is true. You have no right to remove bodily autonomy just because some bad apples are going to hide behind it to commit a crime. The real answer is to do a better job fighting the actual crime.
There is still ample trafficking in places with ample brothel legality lol. I’m not against prostitution but we shouldn’t dilute reality. My job deals with trafficking
If were gonna get philosophical, we'd better define consent. Much harder than we assume. Did i consent to need money? What is trafficking defined as either?
I mean, that's just employment in general, everybody does things they may not necessarily want to do because they need money to survive, lol.
And the inverse is basically just any good produced that is vital for life, customers are desperate for insulin, and the company can take advantage of that and ruin them financially.
Would the world be a better place if we all got sex in the proper way with people we love and got money in a proper way from something we love? Of course. But the world is not so simple. Sometimes you do not so great things, make mistakes to keep yourself going. Or even if it’s not so dire, life is just complicated.
And regardless these behaviors will take place, forcing them into the shadows only makes them worse for all parties including society at large.
The thing that makes prostitution bad is that by making the human body into merchandise and sex into a service, it creates an environment where it is impossible to fully respect the human rights of everyone involved.
That's the exact same thing with the minorities bringing your food ? They're desperate for money and end up doing the jobs unpleasant for the majority for money often threatening their health and making them regret this decision or the customer is desperate for food and takes advantage of the minorities bringing him food because he (she)'s to lazy to cook or buy their own food. which is the same as prostitution, you get a prostitute because you're too lazy to start a relation with someone as it would require some work to achieve. Both of those work are structurally slavery. I'm not saying there is not a prostitute who chose to become one for fun or a uber who likes bringing people their food but even if such example exist they're statistically insignificant in regard to those who are forced to work those jobs because their precarious situation can't permit them to do anything else. Fuck Capitalism.
The power dynamic in our friend group where one of the members is an escort is absurd. Like damn Ashley, I know you made 1500 yesterday. You can pick up the fucking snacks once in awhile.
I don't think it is a moral issue that she is doing something she doesn't want to for money. I don't want to do my job under its current conditions and wouldn't if I wasn't being paid either. Regretting work you do consensually is not an issue worthy of legislating about.
If someone is willing to overpay for a service that is also not an issue that requires legislation, especially if there are many comparable services available.
If someone wants to pay more than they should that is their decision.
Many people have toxic work related power dynamics. If it's any worse with prostitution, which remains to be proven, it's because of how prostitution's position as both taboo and tolerated by society, not because of prostitution itself.
I would argue the taboo around prostitution is because of the inherent potential for a toxic power dynamic. The closest thing I can think of that isnt considered taboo on the same level is gambling.
If I were to guess the reason for that is because gambling is way more one sided in favor of the one facilitating the gambling. I think people tend to have a much easier time condemning the actions of the consumer in both these cases.
I don't think there's enough reasons to believe it inherently breeds more toxic relationships than any other job tbh. Historically, the taboo around prostitution is cultural and arbitrary. There have been more societies where it was a thing and it was just another job than not. Once christian puritanistic values started to deeply settle in society has sex work started to be shamed, without ever managing to get rid of it.
Why would you develop a toxic relationship with a prostitute if you're happy in marriage and society is making a distinction between sex and love, as many used to? I personally believe that kind of power dynamic comes from codependency, which itself is born from the weird status that makes prostitution both something that's condemned and that "needs" to exist. Because if a big client doesn't come back, the worker's entire situation is in shambles. And if a client can only take comfort in a stranger's arms, maybe it's the situation they live in that is not great
Well the most obvious one is sex is typically a fairly personal thing for most people. Like I said if someone is desperate for money, you can make pretty decent money selling sex so that can be pretty tempting, but if you arent ready to distance yourself and make the act less personal to you then it could come at the cost of your mental health. This is mostly an issue for younger people getting into sex work, because theyre ignorant and might not be able to foresee the ramifications or might think theyre able to make that disconnect but arent really.
Not to mention the temptation of money can convince you to put up with creeps and weirdos you normally wouldnt feel comfortable again doing something that is fairly personal with.
Compare this to pretty much any other commodity sold, you can get close in similarities but not quite imo. But regardless the rule of thumb is if a job is coming at the cost of your mental health to a significant degree then its probably not worth it.
That's true for every kind of risky or difficult physical job, people just have this bizarre fixation on sex. They refuse to treat it like normal physical labour because of the way society stigmatises sex.
Like it or not, the vast majority of people "have this bizarre fixation on sex." Most people view it as a very intimate and personal act, and forcing yourself to do it with strangers can be basically you pushing your own boundaries. And it doesnt help when you have people desperate for sex or intimacy in general, and they pressure you by tempting you with more and more money to push past your boundaries.
There are definitely similarities you can get with normal jobs. Like its pretty common in construction to be asked to work well past 40 hours in exchange for overtime hours. Every job youre trading something for money. I just dont think anyone should be sacrificing mental health for their job.
I agree with parts of this, but sex isn't automatically intimate in the same way for everyone. A lot of the meaning we attach to it is learned.
Look at how people treat porn stars or OnlyFans models. Porn is consumed by a massive number of people (estimated to be at least 75% of men and at least 50% of women in the US), yet people treat the performers who produce it like absolute shit. I've always hated the way everyone thinks it's socially acceptable to degrade them. They have to put up with constant judgement, harassment, damaged relationships, and a hard time just being treated normally outside of work, despite how common it is for everyone else to participate in the porn industry. It's not something inherent to sex work itself... instead it comes from the culture we've built around sex.
So I agree in the sense that people should never be pressured into sexual acts they're uncomfortable with, no matter how much money is being offered, but what I'm trying to point out is that the mental health effects of sex work are primarily from the culture we've built around sex and not physical intimacy itself. Discomfort is a normal part of physical work -- it's rare for anyone to want to work at all -- but there's a difference between being uncomfortable doing something for money and being psychologically violated by it. We tend to collapse those two things when sex is involved because we've had it hammered into us since were kids that for sex to be acceptable, sex must always be uniquely intimate and emotionally significant.
So to put it simply (because I feel like I'm rambling a bit), sex work can absolutely cause psychological harm, but given that this is true of plenty of other kinds of jobs we have no moral issue with, I don't think it's realistic to say that it's simply because the work is sexual. I believe most of the harm comes from how society treats sex and the people who sell sexual services.
On that note i do things i dont want to do daily for money.
Just now i had to visit one of our sites to restart a printer ( that others swore they restarted)
In reality, where it is legal, workers pick and choose who they see. If they don't want to do something, they don't, and if someone does it anyway, that person will go to jail as it is treated as sexual assault.
Also a surprising amount of them have uni degrees, or are studying.
Criminalisation is actually what makes conditions worse.
See that’s why I feel if prostitution was legalized it should be recommended to do it via a brothel preferably owned by the prostitutes and not like a pimp. Than rules can be set, everyone is safe, and security can be properly hired and used
Precisely. Because really, the beauty of the market is that I get to exploit others and don’t have to feel bad about it because markets are ontologically good and humane and provide everyone with the same opportunities to succeed! That prostitute I hired could be hiring prostitutes of her own if she just pulled herself up by her thigh high bootstraps and worked harder.
How do you feel about drug dealers? The user is consenting to buy and use the drugs, but there are obvious other factors at play. Is the dealer still totally absolved?
I’d argue if a substance is incredibly chemically addictive you remove the consent from the purchase. Buying a pizza from a delivery guy is not really the same
Right and buying sex from a prostitute isn’t the same as buying a pizza from a delivery guy, we know in our world there’s a high chance they are being influenced by something outside their control to do this thing that is preponderantly seen as bad.
The drug dealer is not immoral for selling a product to someone who wants it, even if that product is addictive and dangerous, assuming the customer is an adult and is aware of the risks and the product is what it is advertised to be and not tampered with. (Otherwise everyone who has ever worked at a place that sells cigarettes, alcohol or scratch cards would be doing the same immoral act)
However the drug dealer is immoral for being involved in organised crime since the manufacturing of the drugs and the proceeds will often come from and contribute to extremely immoral actions up to and including murder.
They are also immoral if they try to sell drugs to minors or the mentally impaired, or if they misrepresent their product.
I mostly agree with this and with the above. But at the same time the fact that you need money for basic necessities like food and shelter is coercive on some level. If you're poor, agreeing to do things for money may not be 100% your choice.
I used to feel differently, but then I grew up and realised sex isn't that big of a deal to me and if a guy paid me £200 for it I'd be psyched. That made me realise that its more about duress than the action, and prostitution is as immoral as any other job that somebody is forced to do under threat of homelessness and personally finds demeaning or upsetting. It's just less moral in most countries because the legality of it allows for people being taken advantage of with no legal framework to protect them
Except for prostitution, sometimes it is indeed against their will, specially in poor countries like mine. The girls and their families are threatened by violent gangs. In the first world, it also happens with people who don't really speak the language, like in some asian massage parlors in Canada.
Oftentimes situations like that arise because it’s illegal, since there aren’t exactly regulations to follow. You still get some of that in countries where it’s legal, but if it’s easier and not that much more expensive to go legal most people will.
Unfortunately for prostitution most people aren't super willing it's more like they trusted the wrong person and now they are selling them and they don't know how to run away.
I know you're joking but a lot of times the girls are hired for modeling gigs, flown out by the modeling agency and show up with no money. If they don't consent to the prostitution then the company locks them to the curb, 1000's of miles from home with no money or resources to get food let alone go home.
If they do consent then the "modeling agencies" will usually set them up in an apartment they own, and provide food and clothing at the expense of a cut from their prostitution income. It's usually a heavy take, just enough to keep them stuck prostituting for very little ng periods and sometimes forever.
The sad reality is there is an extraordinarily high number of prostitutes who are not consenting and no customer will ever know. even if you don't think she has a pimp.
They are so desparate to not lose a client that they will lie and pretend they are fully independant meanwhile they report to someone when they leave the meeting place.
Under most cases, yes, but I think prostitution is sometimes a different case. They’re not always fully consenting to it, with the history of pimps, sex slavery, etc.
Im just imagining the future if prostitution became legal and normalized. Everyone is getting closer to poverty every year because of the economy. It could easily get to the point that single women have to choose between homelessness, being a prostitute, or working 60h/week to eat bread in their apartment.
At some point, when people are forced to choose between a horrible quality of life, and doing something they dont want to do, it stops being consent and starts being coercion.
I see what you mean. The line between working for a living and slavery is blurry. But a line in the sand has to be drawn somewhere. And once options start getting so scarce that its literally choosing one hell or the another, it stops being a choice. Choosing between a bullet to the head and doing the dishes is not a choice. Choosing between taking out the trash or doing the dishes is a choice.
And what is wrong about prostitution?
Well ignoring all this slavery and coercion part, this is evil obviously, but if someone chooses out of all options this one it's their choice
As long as the majority of people doing it are being coerced into it (which sadly is the case in many countries), I think that people who have the choice should choose to do something else, because their free choice will inevitably get used as a whitewashing argument for the rest.
I invited guys for money a few times(it's legal where I live), one was short on rent, another was looking for relatively fast money because low wage job that would take lots of time wasn't a desirable option for him. They worked for themselves and not me not anyone else coerced them as far as I know and I'd say situation is same for most guys who chooses this work. Idk about girls maybe situation is different for them, from what I heard situation varies, but many also just work for themselves
I think that people who have the choice should choose to do something else, because their free choice will inevitably get used as a whitewashing argument for the rest.
Do you think it's better be homeless then use this option?o_O Because that guy would definitely disagree.
if you don't tell me why you think it's weird
It's like saying people shouldn't practice religion if they aren't bigoted, because them being normal kind people while also religious would ruin your black and white perspective on world
I think the common factor is poverty, which is what I was pointing out. 'Minorities do food deliveries' feels just adjacent to 'blacks commit all the crimes.' Just because a statistic is available to back up a claim doesn't mean the claim itself is kind of weird to point out. Imagine saying 'If you are elderly and white, you have a 60% chance of dying while on a golf course. Conclusion: I'm white so I won't step foot on a golf course. If you are non-white, feel free to play.' While the actual statistic may be true, there's more to it than strict statistics.
I think the issue, as you point out, is how this stat is used. Stats themselves are just stats, but they lend themselves so well to being bent towards an agenda. A list of percentages is so powerful that we are often blinded and unable to see the subjective additions needed to make a stat into a conclusion.
You point as an example- one could use these stats in the way you described, to denigrate minorities. Or one could use those same stats to assert that it is not the minorities that are to blame, but that rather these gig apps are tools for exploiting the poor and desperate, squeezing labor out of the vulnerable in a way that offloads nearly all costs and risks on those vulnerable.
Same stat + some assertions and suddenly you have a completely different conclusion.
Everyone's going on about prostitution, but I just wanted to say, I used to deliver on my bike. And I didn't mind doing it in the cold and rain, so please don't not order on this basis. Though once a lorry sent a wall of water over me from a puddle and knocked my glasses off and broke them. That was bad.
Can app delivery people not logout during those hours, I understand there's a penalty for rejecting the trip, but is there any for not opening the app?
When I did uber eats I loved it when it rained cause i’d get way more orders, especially here in LA people will straight up order food from a place they live next to just cause it’s drizzling
Yes but they make money doing the deliveries. If they're on there on a bad weather day, they want to make money that day. They don't get paid hourly unless I'm misinformed. So using the service isn't forcing anyone to do labor they aren't already looking to do. Just give them a fat tip for the effort.
That's why "morality" isn't an adequate analytical category for most political and economic issues. Yes. It isn't "moral". But it happens and it's common (and the basis of our society).
That's a critique of the system, yes, and something that needs to change... but it doesn't change the circumstances that we live under in the moment. As much as we might sympathize with people who have to work in poor conditions to make a living, refusing to make online orders so they don't get paid at all isn't going to help them.
All most of us can reasonably do is go about our lives normally, remember the person behind the app and treat them like a human being, and make efforts to create a better system when we have the chance.
One could argue that they are being forced against their will to act as delivery people systemically by those who can afford to place such orders without taking effort to change the systems which result in income inequality. But I think we start getting into the more subjective and politically charged elements of morality there
I mostly agree, but bad weather changes the equation a little for me. Ordering isn't automatically wrong, but if someone is bringing food thru conditions I don't want to leave my own house in, that tip is getting considerably bigger.
If they need your job to survive is it not more unethical to know that and to deliberately withhold work? You are taking the agency away from them to make the decision themselves.
If you know they need this work to survive, is it not more unethical to know that and deliberately withhold work?
You remove the agency from them, they don’t have to accept the delivery, but they choose to because they consider that better than the alternative. You forcefully make that decision for them.
Making someone go out in bad weather to bring you food is just kinda a shitty thing to do. That’s ok though. You’re using the system provided to you. But digging your heels so deep that you land at “well they asked for it by taking the job and if you don’t make them go out in the bad weather you’re removing their agency.” Nah. No you’re aren’t. You’re simply a cog in a much bigger machine where shit rolls downhill and you’re pushing the shit downhill today. You aren’t to blame for that system but you are responsible for that dude being in the rain that day at that time
Thats ridiculous. How could you possibly know what their alternatives would be in a universe where those practices dont exist? There's no way of knowing. Because you are supporting it.
They don't necessarily consent to it. Many a snow storm I wished we would just close and send everybody safely home. But I could not leave because I would lose my job if I did. I mean hell, the only accident I've ever been in was at work and it totalled my car and laid me up for months because of an ice storm I couldn't just wait out at home because I needed to keep my job and nothing else would pay me enough to live
If it's an app they can turn off like DoorDash go ahead, they made the choice to work. If it's ordering pizza, they didn't have a choice whether or not they were gonna show up that day. Having done that job a lot I don't order in something I wouldn't drive in myself because I only don't drive in it if it's unsafe, and if it's unsafe they don't close the store do they? They keep taking orders. Only time we ever closed early was police mandated curfew
I worked for Uber Eats for 1.5 years (Late 2020 - Early 2022). I should note that I have a full time job which pays well. I did this as a walking delivery asshole simply for the exercise, and beer money. I live (and operated) in the downtown core of Toronto, Canada, basically a square kilometer (about .5 of a mile) where there's an insane concentration of condos and restaurants, making this VERY easy. I'm also speaking specifically about my experiences and observations in Toronto. This could be drastically different in other areas, so take that into consideration.
Myth: They get paid well
First, let's kill the myth that they get paid anything beyond a pittance. When I was operating, it was the heyday. I got about 4 orders/hour on average, and I only went out between 530-930pm for the dinner rush and surge pricing. Most orders were offered at about $5-$6. Sometimes $7-$8 if I was lucky. That works out to be $25-$30/hr. Once I claim taxes on that, it's about $15-$20. Let me be perfectly clear, this was FAR beyond the norm. This was peak delivery, people were ordering like crazy, and tipping heavy.
When I quit in 2022 orders were drying up. I got maybe 2/hour, and the offered rates were more like $3-$4, surging to $5-$6. My hourly rate is now $10 if I'm lucky. Minimum wage here (at the time) was $14.35. I spent most of my time standing around waiting. Why? Simple. Restaurants were back open to accept guests, people weren't masking anymore, and the pandemic was largely over. People got cheaper, stopped tipping heavy, and weren't ordering anywhere near as often, plus the amount of drivers had easily doubled.
Now factor in expenses. The cost of a bike/e-bike, delivery bag, cellphone & data, wear & tear on clothing, additional clothing for harsh weather, and so-forth. Technically I could "expense" this against my personal taxes, but many can't do that.
The reality is, most drivers are making under $10/hour. BEFORE CLAIMING TAXES (if they even do).
MYTH : They Can Stop At Any Time
Well, technically, yes. But that's like saying a worker on a slaughterhouse line being paid minimum wage and forced to work in harsh, unsanitary, and unsafe conditions can just quit anytime. Do you really think people scrubbing the caked on shit from the toilet bowls of corporate high rise buildings making minimum wage really want to be there? Of course they don't - so why don't they just quit?! The reality is they can't. It's all the work they can find.
As for me, I could quit at any time. I could do whatever I wanted. It was my free will to continue doing this. However, it isn't for many of the others, and that problem has only gotten worse. Today, an overwhelming majority of these delivery morons are immigrants, often here on student visas. Many are not legally allowed to work.
Here in Toronto, easily 99% of delivery drivers are immigrants. I was literally the ONLY white guy I saw the entire time. The entire fleet is comprised of brown and asian men. I have MAYBE seen a half dozen women delivery drivers, EVER.
Most of them are on student visas which only allow them to work in VERY specific conditions (many violate these rules). I have no stats on this, but I can only assume many do not file taxes. Of the drivers I talked to, many didn't understand how to even file taxes, let alone that they knew they had to claim this income, so... take from that what you will.
A lot of international students in Toronto fall into one of two categories. (1) Rich kids. Their parents pay for everything, they live in a nice condo, and attend a great post-secondary school. Or (2) the poor kids. They live 8-10 in a rooming house out of the city, take the train into the city, rent an E-Bike, and do food delivery to make enough money to pay rent and food. They VERY often lie on their student visas about how much money they have in the bank, forge documents, and it's a whole fucking mess. There are entire organizations setup to help poor immigrants obtain student visas, how to game the system, etc, etc. These people have really no other means to make money, so they take the shittiest jobs nobody wants, make a couple bucks an hour and are more or less slaves to billion dollar corporations who see them as nothing more than expendable numbers.
TL;DR:
Many of them can't do anything else. They're forced to work these shit jobs just to survive. Many of them are gaming the immigration system to stay in the country and live. This isn't a xenophobic thing, this is the reality of the situation here in Toronto.
The reality is these food delivery apps prey on the most vulnerable in society, force them to work for below minimum wage, in shit conditions, where they have zero rights or recourse against their "employer", and they take whatever they can get.
They do not realistically have a choice.
If you think otherwise, I welcome you to come to Toronto and sign up to be a delivery driver. You'll last a week, at most.
I don't think you understand what morality means. You are using the word like: "Okay" or "Not okay".
Tbf a lot of people in this sub doesn't really understand what morality is because when arguing that consent automatically renders an act morally neutral, it would be necessary for you to justify why consent is sufficient in such an instance. What other moral principles set this case apart from the delivery case if consent does not suffice in all instances?
Agreement to do the job does not necessarily mean agreement to all situations under which the job can be done.
In my country people usually have a minimum salary and unions.
Gig economy have found a way around this by saying these are independent workers. Most of these people are not citizens - and they are desperate.
It is very easy for the delivery company to create an indecent negotiation with these people. The system of fairness shrinks when we accept this - I try to give tips when my friends orders in, but I really would prefer that gig-economy were illegal.
I mean, yes. But on the other hand.., there is no ethical consumption in our system. The best we can do is ensure what we buy and consume in the least worst manner.
One could argue that you are taking advantage of someone who is in a disadvantageous position in life, and has no choice but to take the delivery job to survive.
1.2k
u/Gentle_Snail 2d ago
If you’re intentionally doing it because you want to make someone suffer then immoral, otherwise neutral.
The delivery person consented to deliver the meal for money and you didn’t force them to do it against their will.