Marc Andre requested a discussion about prostitution as a choice from an ethical point of view. This is a really big topic, and I’m sure it will generate some talk, so get ready kids!
OK, so I’ll begin by saying that I don’t have a problem with prostitution from a moral standpoint. Selling sex for money isn’t really problematic for me morally. But it’s not so simple as that, is it?
There is much I do find problematic about prostitution. (I will save discussion of pornography for another time; I’ve written a bit about it before, but not enough to satisfy myself.) To start, prostitution is an unsafe industry for workers because it is not regulated. I strongly support regulating prostitution for the protection of sex workers. I think prostitution should be legalized worldwide, and the industry should be taxed and monitored, and the health of sex workers should be of paramount importance in regulation. I also think illegal prostitution should be vigorously prosecuted, particularly when the sex worker is underage or under the physical/psychological control of another person, and both the workers and the customers who engage in illegal prostitution should be legally penalized.
The second thing I find problematic about prostitution is the commodification of female sexuality. This is a concern that I have about pornography as well. Female sexuality is being subverted left and right in this society, for selling everything from cars to beer to deodorant. Female sexuality is a tool for marketing, a tool used by white male power to build more power through generating wealth, a tool to control those who are not in power. Women’s bodies become mere conduits of female sexuality – which promises everything, if you can harness it. Vicious cycle. And it seems to me that the most devastating effects of this are seen in two places: rape victims/survivors and sex workers. The bodies of sex workers are used for more than simply sex. They are used to reaffirm male power and privilege through the trading of female sexuality for money. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Women’s bodies and the sites for the expression of patriarchy. ***I haven’t studied enough about gay prostitution to comment much, but I think some of this must be transferable, particularly the power dynamics around money that occur between customers and sex workers.
Sex workers sell sex, and in the world of supply and demand, the demand is what controls the supply. Meaning the customer decides the terms of the transaction. So far, this is no different than selling anything else. But when what you are selling is your body, your sexuality, your body and your sexuality is no longer your own – at least not for however long it takes to perform the service. (a little Marx with your coffee?) When all you have is your labour – your body, your sexuality – to offer the market, you have little power.
The third thing that I find troubling about sex work that there does seem to be a lack of other options among sex workers. For the most part, sex workers trade sex for money because they don’t have much choice. They don’t have education or marketable skills behind them. There is often addiction involved. Sometimes other factors play a part in not being able to secure legal employment – for example, people on the fringes of mainstream society – like transfolk – sometimes turn to prostitution because of the prejudice they face in traditional workplaces. Much of the time, there is a history of sexual abuse. There simply isn’t a lot of opportunity to make a decent living doing anything else. The argument that prostitutes could simply choose to get up one morning and get a job at Tim Horton’s doesn’t hold a lot of water with me. *** I am not saying that all prostitutes fit into this description, or that all poor, uneducated, unskilled, sexually abused, addicted, and/or transgendered people have no other option than sex work. I’m saying that there’s more to the story of the lives of prostitutes than simply choosing their work. When it’s a matter of a roof over your head and food in your stomach and the stomachs of your children, and having no skills, no education, no prospects of employment that will pay for everything you need, and you have nobody to help you out, there isn’t much choice involved.
Which brings me, finally, to a particular segment of feminism that sticks in my craw every time. Choice feminism. The feminism that says, “The women’s movement is all about choice.” I find this branch of feminism both extremely frustrating and extremely intriguing, because I think there is a lot of potential, but also a lot of gaps. There are many, many sex workers out there who say they have made the choice to do their work, that they do have other options and they like what they do or they prefer it for whatever reason, and there is no false consciousness (more Marx) involved, and any claims to the contrary are condescension that denies them their autonomy. Well, here’s what I think about that.
I think that in a capitalist patriarchal society, as a woman, it isn’t really possible to make a completely free choice to sell your body. Period. Hell, if I don’t think Britney Spears is particularly free, I sure as hell don’t think sex workers are! I think there are lots of choices a woman can make freely, but this is not one of them. As I’ve said before, I think there are many many obstacles to exercising free will, and we only have as much freedom as determinative forces allow us to have. Autonomy is not black or white, either have it or don’t. It is a matter of degrees. As is choice. And a choice to resist does not make a necessity the corollary choice to comply.
So, if I feel this way, why do I advocate legalizing sex work? And how do I explain my own behaviour that plays into patriarchy, like wearing skirts and high heels and lipstick?
Well, I advocate legalizing sex work because I think it is not safe for women and men and transfolk who do it. I think that prostitution is not going away anytime soon, and I would rather see protections put in place for sex workers than have the situation continue on in the manner it currently exists. I think that is the least we can do to alleviate some of the problesm sex workers face. I think it would also be wonderful to offer sex workers education and skills training in other industries for free, so that their options are not limited to sex work or minimum wage. I would love to make drug testing mandatory for sex workers along with STI testing. I would love to see psychological counselling made available to sex workers to help them work out issues around sexual abuse, rape, abortion, family and friends, violence and other potential hazards of their job and their life intersecting. I first and foremost want to see prostitution be at the very least a safe way to make a living – if not a free one, a safe one.
As for other “choices” under patriarchy, well, I don’t have an easy answer about that. I struggle a lot with how patriarchy impacts my life, and the ways in which I have been conditioned to be feminine. I don’t claim that all my choices are free just because I’m aware of my conditioning and I participate in things like high heel wearing and leg shaving anyway. But, I don’t think that feminism is about making women into men. I think feminism is about celebrating women, and making it possible to make a free choice to be as feminine as you want to be, as androgynous as you want to be, as butch as you want to be, whatever. I think it is about removing the negative associations with femininity and womanhood and creating equality, true egalitarianism for everyone regardless of sex (and sexuality, and race, and ability, and class, etc). So, one day, I hope to say that a woman can freely choose to be a sex worker. I just can’t say it today.
Marc Andre, thanks for the suggestion for this post!
You’re welcome.
I’ve always had an ambivalent reaction to prostitution: can’t say I’m for it (I hate the idea of someone paying to control someone else’s sexuality), but I don’t want it to stay illegal. I think you nailed it: It’s not gonna disappear anytime soon, so might as well make it the safest environment possible while we work on awareness.
Maybe the nature of prostitution is rooted in the nature of the society we live in and its value has to be divorced from that society somewhat to receive a clearer picture. Obvious, I know.
Check out this link (http://www.sexuality.org/l/workers/mtsp.html) and let me know what you think.
Certainly, prostitution as it exists here and elsewhere is problematic. I was just thinking how, when a high profile prostitution ring gets exposed, often, the positions of the men who seek sex work are the highest in the society: judges, doctor, politicians, celebrities, athletes.
What does that mean?
What is it about our society that causes people who have access to anything they want, to turn to professional sex workers? Is that inherently wrong? Perhaps, the issue is deeper than the surface context, deeper than the idea of intentionally degrading and subjugating women.
‘Sexual Healing’ is not a 20th Century, Marvin Gaye inspired concept. Sex has been used as a healing force for a long time. Thinking more about this one…
Hi Marc Andre,
thanks for your comment. You know, it’s not even paying to control someone else’s sexuality that I don’t like the thought of. I don’t think someone’s sexuality should be controlled by anyone else at all. It’s a hard concept to wrap my head around sometimes, because we have these deep scripts about sex and sexuality and as women, these scripts teach us to be submissive and passive and minister to the needs of men. The scripts do not teach us to be sexual for ourselves, or to own our sexual pleasure in any way. The scripts shame that sort of sexual behaviour – and any that deviate from the heterosexism inherent in them. IT’s a different script altogether that must be written by each individual woman and man, and the coming together of two people involves yet another rewriting – perhaps each time!
Hi Julian,
I checked out your link. Historically, what I know about sacred prostitutes is that they were usually sexual slaves of the temple. I believe the concept came from Greece, where all women were considered whores – even wives. The chattel whores were the lowest, then wives, then prostitutes – they could actually earn money. So, the term is loaded. But aren’t they all? Anyway, reading this woman’s story made me think about the common bit of feminist theory that says the oppressed often internalize their oppression. Combine that with scripts about sexuality and sex, and scripts about women’s place in society, and things get complicated. I wonder if her role isn’t a matter of a sexual fetish of some sort? It’s hard to say. But, again, freedom of choice needs to be questioned all the time in an unequal society. Even when choices seem free, perhaps they are not fully free.
In my opinion, there is a lot of difficulty with sexuality, because it is pre-written behaviour ascribed to us. It is my job to question everything, and I have been doing that with sexuality a lot lately. Where do our preferences come from? What of those preferences are scripted? What does it mean if I like something that has been scripted for me, because I am a female? How does that affect my politics? How can I avoid power differentials in sexual relationships? Do I need to let go of my politics to get off? Sexuality is very messy and complicated.
getting back to the idea of sacredness in sex, I think this is becoming a bit of a lost art. I have felt this sacredness. But it is elusive. Maybe it is only ever a mere glimpse.
What you bring up about successful men who use the services of prositutes and sex workers is a good point. I think there is a drunkenness these super-elite people experience with power. It’s perhaps a bit of a feeling of invincibility, like nothing is out of reach to them. I think part of it has to do with the consumptiveness of our society – if your wife doesn’t want to fulfill a particular sexual desire you have, if you’re wealthy enough you can buy it from someone else. It turns sex into a product to be consumed, and the sex worker into another proletariat. I think there’s a laziness about this consumption, a nonchalance and uncaringness that is really symptomatic of the upper class. We certainly see it all the time – look at how we rich countries in the west treat the earth, for example. Anyway, capitalists practice the religion of consumption, of excess. Why should it be different with people? especially people that they have been taught don’t really matter anyway – women.
You’re right, it’s not just the paying, it’s the whole idea of controlling; it’s just that in this case it happens to be through money.
As for the high-level men and prostitution, let’s not forget that the information we get is biased. The media jumps on their names, but are there greater numbers of high-level clients than average joes? Of course, like TG says, they’ve got the money, and they like to have power over people.
I believe average Joe’s predominate in the prostitution biz; I just think its interesting that men of power need to go that route.
The other thing that I think is missed is the healing aspect of the exchange. I believe, in spite of the trappings around the sexual act – the money exchange, the power differential – it is always a spiritual experience. It may be devoid of spiritual intention, but because of the nature of the experience (if we’re talking about intercourse particularly), its always spiritual. IMHO.
What about Tantra?
Sex and childbirth (help me if I’m missing something) are the two most powerful human experiences. (Okay, death) I think we have to look at the fact that in spite of the negative container, ‘sex for hire’ has the ‘potential’ to reanimate us, revive us spiritually.
The issue of the ‘free society’ is interesting because, to my knowledge, none has ever existed. No society has ever been that was based on the equality/freedom of every man, woman and child of every hue, class or sexual orientation. I think prostitution has to be observed and evaluated with that understanding.
You mention difficulty with sexuality; our ‘problems’ with sexuality are scripted as well. We live in a puritanical society which speaks liberty out of its mouth and repression out the side of its neck. Could this be a part of the difficulty around sex?
The doublespeak, the dirtifying of sex…
Why do we worry so much about the money/power aspect of the prostitution gig? Is it really the lack of power of women in the exchange, or is it our discomfort with sex itself, the use of sex in a manner that suggests the woman or man DOES have agency?
mmm, tantra.
I don’t know about the spiritual aspect of sex being always present. I think it is if you’re in the right mindset for it to be. Obviously, we’re only talking about consensual sex here. I’ll have to think about that.
Oh yeah, there’s no free society. only a free market society.
yes, I think that is part of problems around sexuality – the two-facedness of our libertarian-liberal christian-moral society. guilt, shame, sin, deviants, sluts, whores, dykes, fags… hell in a handbasket. (where is the word for a sexually promiscuous man? Stud? Player? Dog? none of those have quite the bite that slut does.)
For me, the problem with prostitution really is about power imbalances under patriarchy. I’m a sex-positive feminist insofar as I don’t believe sex should be associated with negatives all the time, and that women should be free to enjoy sex and sexuality. But I can’t go along with saying that women can be free to do so right now, because patriarchy still does rule these societies of ours, placing women at a disadvantage economically – which leads to the need to do sex work. It’s economic empowerment and options women need to break out of the vicious cycle of prostitution. That and the moral watchdogs to shut the hell up about it.
by the way, thanks for the interesting and insightful comments, and for exploring this topic with me.
You’re welcome, TG. I just posted a link on my site, to a wonderful open letter from a sexworker to radfems who don’t like and savage sex pos folk and sex workers. Let me know what you think.
I have to tell you that I have done some sexual explorations that I never thought I would try – in order to challenge my conceptions of sex.
I’m a recovering Catholic and had very rigid, fear based feelings about sex. I began to be exposed to ideas that challenged my belief system and decided to say YES and try a few things.
The exploration was amazing. I paid for…things…that were against my former code…and I found that hidden, buried stuff came flooding out of me. I had an experience where I sobbed like somebody really close to me had died. I was terrified I’d discovered that I’d been abused. But it was fear upon fear. And I would never have known if I hadn’t crossed the line and transgressed certain norms.
Best thing I ever did.
thanks, I’ll check out your link.
recovering Catholic… I’m a recovering Baptist. I understand the need to break free, to try new things and challenge old ideas.
Now I get what you mean about spirituality being present in such a transaction. Good can indeed come out of an encounter like yours, for the customer and, perhaps, for the worker.
I don’t doubt that some sex workers have great experiences some of the time. But it seems to me as though it’s not the ones who make $10 a pop… not the ones who can really turn someone down. I’ve seen these women in the early mornings, lifeless eyes, hungry and itching for a hit of something, powerless in more ways than one. There’s nothing soulful about these women – and men – in this situation. Their bodies and spirits are so abused. But, these aren’t the only type of sex workers – just the majority. I feel the way I do mostly out of concern for them.
Anyway, I’m glad you were able to get past what you needed to get past. For you, the pros outweighed any cons that might have entered your mind. But, that’s still a lot of privilege – male hetero privilege, economic privilege – that I’m guessing your sex worker didn’t share. And again, I don’t have a problem with paying for sex in and of itself. It’s the inequality involved, the powerlessness on the part of the workers. I truly think that regulation of the industry would serve to help eliminate some of that inequality – standardized rates, for example. But, even still, there will always be someone desperate enough to turn tricks illegally, for less… and someone willing to take advantage of that. I’m not sure there will ever be a perfect system, or a perfect society of perfect equality. All guesses point to NO. But, idealism still has its place, I think, and don’t we have to try to get there?
thanks for sharing. I appreciate it very much.
I have often thought that I am selling my intellect to the highest bidder, since I am an IT worker. I don’t have control of what I think about, I don’t have control of the output of my work.
But that is ok, because I am getting a tangible earning from it, and to be sure I wouldn’t think about some of the things I do without a paycheck.
I do realize it is different for prostitutes and the selling of their bodies, but maybe not so much. They are simply selling what they have. How can they sell an intellect that they don’t have?
How come you label this a white patriarchal phenomena? do you think whites are the only ones who propagate this? What about blacks? Have you seen the BET station on TV recently? Rap videos are just ridiculous these days. Do you not think any other race does this too?
Also you say you mainly base you opinion on the worst case scenario of the experience? Is that really fair? Are you not biasing your opinion? Sure seems so. I thought thinking was supposed to allow us to see both sides of the story, and to be sure maybe you do, but you only focus on the bad? How come? no words for the prostitute who IS capable of choosing the senator she will be with for the next?
Thinking girl, how come, ‘girl’? How come not ‘thinking woman’? For a self pro-claimed feminist, girl is not what I would expect.
DG: Blacks participate in a white controlled universe. The black folks who participate, sell out or, prostitute themselves for the money. This, in spite of the fact that the content of their lyrics and videos are so selfhating.
Ask yourself this, though: why are conscious rappers unable, typically, to get the contracts and visibility afforded their brethren? I believe the images that are put out there are intentionally taken – by white company execs (at BET even!) to do what they do – demoralize, distort, control, etc.
DG:
Not all feminists see “girl” as an insult.
And not all prostitutes lack an intellect.
White males are still dominant in soceity no matter how many famous rappers and happy hookers there are. It’s that easy.
wow, a white controlled universe.
huh, well I have never associated white with the universe, but that is something I will have to think about.
so what your really saying is that earth is one big f….n brothel? All of us selling out to the “man”, huh? oh, and the white man at that.
I have to ask myself what does this all boil down to?
Do people not feel that their choices are good enough?
Do you really feel that you can’t reject the message presented?
Why do you feel so powerless in rejecting this message?
Do you think that to reject the message is an all or nothing thing?
Can you not reject some of it, but accept other parts?
There is so much choice I see here, but all I here from many here, is that there is no choice at all?
Where does this thought come from?
DG, I have felt the same about work, too. For a long time I felt like my boss was a pimp of sorts, taking half the money I was earning. Such is capitalism.
Yes, that is one of my main problems – “they are simply selling what they have” – the lack of other options available to sex workers on the whole is what renders them powerless. The elite in society hold the keys, and set the terms that oppress the rest.
As freeslave says (you are getting so many nicknames from me over here!), society is white-male dominated. That is simply the state of the world. So everyone else only gets what they can get under that system… and that usually involves submitting to the white male supremacy at some point or another, just to get by, or perhaps, in order to be a successful capitalist. Freeslave also has an excellent point – the rappers that get the most visibility are the ones that propagate white male power, by portraying themselves as criminals, drug addicts and dealers, pimps (and their women as whores), and only concerned with bling – parodies and caricatures. We don’t see so much of socially conscious rappers.
Of course I’m most concerned with the most oppressed, the most powerless. I’m glad for some women who actually do have the ability to choose to be sex workers, and who can choose to do it safely. I wish every sex worker had that chance. But they don’t. And the thing I hear most about sex work is that the workers choose it – but most have no other choice for various reasons. The women who are so in control of their lives that they can choose sex work out of many other options don’t need me to advocate for them – they are doing a pretty good job of it themselves. But it’s important to remember that just because some women can choose sex work, doesn’t mean all women can. (and men, let’s not forget male sex workers.) I’d say the majority cannot. And I still say, under patriarchy-capitalism, most of us haven’t as much choice as we think we do.
As far as my screen name, I chose it a long while ago. I’ve thought of changing it, but I’m loathe to change my name, in real life or cyber space. I am a woman, and I am a girl. Since I think feminism is about embracing and reclaiming and celebrating woman- and girl-hood, and not trying to make women into men, I’m happy with it. Breaking down gender stereotypes is the key – so if I call myself Thinking Girl and project the adult views that I do, doesn’t that help upset the stereotype? The name suits me fine. Besides, “thinking woman” doesn’t have the same ring to it!
welcome Renegade! thanks for stopping in.
A little truth about the choices and options given to some women these days:
One of the women I work with as a stripper is college educated and worked for many years as a teacher, junior high. Very respectable, I would say. She is also a single mother (widow, actually). Well, teaching did not pay the bills so she started doing the stripping thing at night to pick up some extra cash in order to provide a better life for herself and kids. Well, when the school system found out about her other job, they fired her. Something about they could not have the parents outraged about a woman who was a stripper teaching their children. They seemed to forget that this woman was a mother and teacher first, but the money she made for doing what she actually really loved (teaching) was not enough for her to live on, whereas now, she dances full time and lives fairly well, but does not love the job.
So there you have it, a woman with an education and a repsectable necessary job who could not make enough money in that job, so took another one to make up the difference…and only got screwed over in the effort to live yet do what she loved at the same time.
Is there something very, very wrong with this? Yes, there is.
TK;
Thanks, interesting blog you have here, I dig it.
no you are certainly correct thinking girl, “thinking woman” doesn’t have the same ring to it. But the ring is the feeling given to it by our white patriarchal society.
when you say lack of options makes them powerless, aren’t you making an assumption about what constitutes an option?
Aren’t you assuming that to have an option it must appear dignified in our white patriarchal society?
Because in doing so you are choosing to propagate and continue our white patriarchal values and using them to make your argument.
And maybe thats what I am trying to come to grips with, all your arguments are based on the white patriarchy. And doesn’t that mean that in order to do that, you have accepted these values and are continuing to propagate them whether you realize it or not?
It really doesn’t matter whether you believe they are right or not, what matters is that in order to argue for or against you have already accepted it as being the authority and in doing so, you have yourself kept those values in a place of authority?
Well, at any rate quite a good debate, I love this thinking stuff, lol.
DG:
No, I don’t think that’s true. The white patriarchy doesn’t want me to make any arguments at all. They want all kinds of people in positions of submission. Their concern isn’t so much with those people’s lack of power, but with their own superiority. They need to feel more powerful and important than all sorts of other people – the more people, the better! the more powerful they are! The more internalized the oppression experienced by the power-less, the more likely white capitalist patriarchy will continue.
The hard part of working and theorizing against white capitalist patriarchy is that they own the tools, they make the rules. The tools are built for them. The rules suit them. Can we use the master’s tool to dismantle the master’s house, or is that impossible (ref: Audre Lorde)? Do we need our own rules? Our own tools?
One tool that I am using is my education. My university education: curriculum agreed upon by white men, operating in a democratic welfare state, paid in part by taxpayers, funded by capitalist corporations, the rest of which is paid for by me myself and I. Lucky me that I can even go and learn what white capitalist patriarchy wants me to learn. And if I work really hard, I’ll get patted on the back by WCP and awarded an A for learning their rules, and my place. My successful academic career is premissed on learning what THEY say I must learn. Is succeeding under a system of WCP success in spite of it, or in compliance with it?
But, good for me that I am learning what is expected of me, learning what they want me to learn, learning waht they want me to be. At the very least, we need to understand the white capitalist patriarchy in order to defeat it. That doesn’t mean accepting its values, that state women and POC and poor and disabled and old and non-christian and homo/bi/trans people are less valuable. I don’t accept that. I don’t support that. I don’t respect that. But I sure do know the rules. Learning them isn’t brainwashing or indoctrination. It’s power, a little tiny bit of power, a sharp little tool to poke out its eyes and slash at its achilles’ heel.
I’m saying, when a person has no other options, they are coerced into doing what white capitalist patriarchy wants them to do. Doesn’t have to do with what WCP says is “right” or “moral” or “good.” It has to do with coercion. To choose something, one must have other options for the choice to be legit. That’s it, and that’s all. When options are denied to a person, for whatever reason, that’s not freedom. Saying a person is free to choose a certain path when all other doors are closed to them is saying nothing at all. We need to make new doors.
hmmm… there is definitely something different between your view of the world and mine.
and i am trying to put my finger on it.
it appears to be our concept of choice.
and I guess I see everything in life as a choice.
whether it ends up being good or bad is not something I really put into the definition of choice. whether it leads to wealth or poverty is irrelevant, whether it leads to life or death, is also not relevant.
But it seems that if something leads to ones death, you would not consider this a choice, you would consider it a lack of choice?
you also seem to take into account external factors. so that if I make a choice, say drinking before driving someone around. and we end up crashing and both dying due to me being drunk, you would say that the passenger had no choice? Is this correct?
I am not sure if I am debating anymore, I am actually now trying to figure out why your view of the world is different then mine.
Hi DG,
A couple months back, I wrote a post about Britney Spears. The discussion was mostly about free will and determinism, and it got talked to death in the comments. It was really useful for me. Mister P worked out a model for free choice that seems to reflect quite well what I think about it. I refer you to comment #40 on that post.
Bascially, I believe that we do have free will, but that determinative forces impede our ability to act freely, and that sometimes we realize what those forces are and sometimes we don’t. This makes free will a matter of degrees, not an absolute. (My position is a compatibilist one, but perhaps not a traditional one for that category of philosophical thought on the issue.) We need to shine a light on those forces that impede our freedom, or we can’t overcome them. Yet, we also must believe tenaciously in our ability to overcome them – nihilism doesn’t help us any. We must, to quote Mister P, “suspend belief in the power of the impediments [to exercising free will] over oneself,” and this includes taking responsibility for things that you aren’t completely responsible for.
So yes, I most definitely take into account external factors. I don’t think we are ever completely free – even when all that impedes our freedom is the laws of nature. Some of us have more determinative forces impeding our free will than others. But yet, the paradoxical part is that we absolutely have to believe we can overcome obstacles to our exercising free will. And this necessarily means we must understand the forces behind the obstacles.
does that help?
Wow…this conversation is deep! I believe in free will as well and choice. I don’t believe in most situations people have NO choice. I believe they have a range of choices which they weed out and select the one that makes the most sense/the one that they are most comfortable with/the one that provides for their needs.
Certainly, money means freedom. I’ve had money once in my life; to be able to get on a plane and go ANYWHERE with no fear of the money running out is incredible. Few of us know that kind of freedom, but…There are different kinds of freedom.
There’s a freedom born of hardship, of death even that is incomparable. A freedom within limitation that people can locate and work to the bone – if they want to.
This society offers folks inducements to DIE spiritually, to become complicit with this diseased culture. I disagree, TG, that the culture wants folks mute. They want people to parrot their bullshit. That’s why you have Clarence Thomas’ and Ann Coulter’s.
Yeah, things can get deep ’round here sometimes. 😀
I think one of the most freeing things for me has been accpeting that if this life is all there is, and there is nothing but a black and consciousless void after death, I’m okay with that. (how’s that for deep? 😛 )
true enough, J. Parroting the bullshit is preferable for sure.
TG: I know I’ve offended against your “List”… mais, Je t’aime ma chere amie. Allez au Paris avec moi; (here’s where it gets tricky) nous ecrivons dans Le Cafe Daunton a pres Metro Odeon. Demain!
I know, I know…I have to act crazy sometimes.
ah, I ty very much tg, I did hit upon that blog entry, and, well, things move pretty fast around here. I will have to go back and see more of the comments in there.
Is this really deep stuff? or does our society just avoid discussions like this? to be relegated to blogs and philosophy classrooms?
I like your reply very much tg, but here is where you and I differ. And I apologize but how much of free will debate has to go back to what we believe in spiritually? It would seem it all falls back on that.
Because when you say that determinative forces impede our free will. I would say, when we were souls, before we incarnated, we choose the determinative forces that we will experience in life. Thus, your free will only begins at life, but mine is inherent in the universe.
I love the way you use the concept, ‘shine a light on forces’, because that is exactly what I believe, except that we are the light, our soul is the inherent light and we have to be able to go within, recognize that light and pull it out to shine on the world, and when we are capable of doing that, the world will be seen for the smoke and mirrors that it is, thus we will have overcome the deterministic forces we set in motion.
And the only way to do this is, ‘to suspend belief in the power of our impedements’.
It is truly amazing how I believe the exact same thing, the only difference is that I have an inherent belief that this little picture we call a world is part of a much bigger picture.
I apologize if I have gone places that people don’t like to go, people don’t ever like to go where faith abides. And I will be content with this discussion after this.
I have actually learned a heck of alot, not only about your views but mine to, thanks.
I have to hit upon one more difference that is fairly vital, and it came to me while I started reading usa#1’s reference to the complex world being a nonlinear dynamic system and he asks,’could one person’s action have such a huge effect if the environment were not there to support it?’
And then it hit me, he has to believe that we are separate to follow this thought. that a person is capable of perfoming an action, any action, and having it absolutely not effect anything else, and I simply don’t believe this.
I believe that, to put it bluntly, we are one, the implications of this are pretty far reaching.
And it our world it means that what you have for breakfast, affects me. Now obviously I don’t realize your choice until I get closer to you. Such as us interacting on this blog, we are aware of a direct interaction and are capable of acknowledging that we are affecting each offer, we may debate the size of the influence, but it is capable of being acknowledged.
something about the equation for gravity and the relationship between size and distance comes to mind, but since I have long forgot my math and physics, I can’t put it into an equation. But that is where it goes.
at any rate it is another vital difference that influences our view of the world…interesting.
DG: I’m feeling you on this. I rarely mention the spiritual either, but it informs my belief system.
This if brilliant: “…we have to be able to go within, recognize that light and pull it out to shine on the world, and when we are capable of doing that, the world will be seen for the smoke and mirrors that it is, thus we will have overcome the deterministic forces we set in motion…”
This is MY truth. But this is one of those layers that few seem to feel, get to or understand when presented with it. Right on, DG.
Ah, Julian, you are so crazy! I like it! 🙂
Merci, merci, merci pour tes affections. Etes-vous serieux? Non, ce n’est pas possible! C’est une reverie, n’est ce pas? vraiment?
Je t’aime aussi, mon ami. Bien sur, Je veut aller a Paris. mais, je veut l’aller quand je peut me payer. Malheureusement, le temps, ce n’est pas maintenant. J’ai des autres responsibilites… mes etudes! mes cartes de credit! ma voiture! mes livres! je suis trop pauvre, avant que l’annee de l’universite a commence! 😦 Ce n’est pas juste!
interesting DG. I really enjoyed reading your comments, thank you. I know you are right about why we differ. I am not a person of deep faith, and I think it has to do wiht my divorce – from christianity. I have been encouraged to expand my notion of faith, and I do find it really difficult. I think I have gone about applying the general reason that I can’t believe in christianity – that there is not way for me to know for certain whether it is true or not, and it seems to fantastical to believe without proof – to every other religious system I have studied – and I have studied a number. I come closest to understanding taoism, and perhaps a bit of zen buddhism, in a way that allows me to open up to spirituality as a different idea, a different phenomenon. The idea of mindfulness appeals to me. The idea of reincarnation appeals to me. The idea of circular energy appeals to me. That doesn’t seem too “out there” to believe without proof. It’s a struggle for me, with faith. I associate it too closely with that from which I have divorced myself. yet, I don’t think we can be so arrogant as to believe we are all there is, that we are not part of a much bigger matrix in the universe.
does that make sense? I tend to remain agnostic on things that I can’t prove, but there is still a niggling feeling I have sometimes.
I too like the idea that we are all interconnected. I think it is true, we are relational beings. I think we are all responsible to one another and for one another, and that’s one of the reasons I believe so much in socialism, in welfare, in the redistribution of wealth, and in overcoming oppression.
thanks for bringing this up DG. I don’t mind talk of spirituality at all on my blog, so feel free. I’m trying to find my own answers to the questions I have about these matters. It’s always good to get input from others who are comfortable with the answers they have found.
Ah, TG, Je suis fou bien sur! Mais, je suis tres serieuse. Vous etes magnifique.
*blushes*
The issue of faith/belief is tres importante. I was an atheist/agnostic for many years. I believed in nurturing a “Spockian-intellect, devoid of emotion. I actually believed that emotion interferred with pure thought. BS!!
What I discovered was I was crazy, that emotion informed my thinking with incredible, vital, detail; I learned that intuition exists if you allow your it.
I learned that there are intangibles in the universe, that there is a stream of goodwill and abundance that one can tap into – if they dare – beneath all of their indoctrination and fear.
What I’ve learned from my thread on (fuck) race is that many have a vested interest in the status quo, even those that are harmed by it. The power of an idea whose time has passed is evidently quite compelling for those who can’t let go.
Its like the quote by Anais Nin: “And the day came when the risk to remain tight in a bud was more painful than the risk it took to blossom.”
Many can’t tell the difference between remaining tight in a bud and blossoming.
Today, I believe there is a power source that I’ve plugged into that guides me. Sometimes I call it God, or Higher Power, or Great Spirit. I just know that my intellect, my spirit, my whole person has THRIVED since I discovered that little voice inside that I’d so studiously ignored.
Bisous ma cherie!
I like that quote very much tfs, keep strengthening that connection to the power source within.
I hope that the facts that prostitution is illegal, has no security and is mixed with drug use, rape and sometimes murder do not lead to the assumption that people who engage in it are somehow to be looked down on, shunned or otherwise negatively treated. Courage, perseverance, intelligence and self-knowledge are often the hallmarks of the successful prostitute. We need society to acknowledge our talents, skills and human worth.
I think it’s very simplistic to think of sex work as a personal choice that has no ramifications beyond the individuals involved. The pro-legalization/decriminalization supporters narrow the topic down to the right of the individual sex-worker to self-determination, and the argument that worker safety and power is increased through this. First, there is no evidence that sex-workers are safer or healthier in a legal system. That is a theoretical argument based on logic but if we look at actual examples there is no evidence of it. There is evidence that expansion of the legal trade also expands the illegal trade and makes it harder to control. There are increases in child prostitution and trafficking. One can say well those things should be cracked down on, but in the real world that isn’t what happens.
Another argument is that women are empowered and are controlling their sexuality when they decide to sell their services. But sexuality is a mutual thing not something women do for men, but something men and women do for one another that is mutually pleasurable. That prostitution is primarily women’s work illustrates subjugation not empowerment. Within a personal relationship (hopefully) sex is negotiated as an act of mutual pleasure, even in a “one-night-stand”. While an individual woman might find selling her services to be an act of empowerment, women as a group are negatively impacted when prostitution is sanctioned. It frames sex as a job that women do for men, like house-keeping.
For the female partner in a relationship refusing sex to the male partner becomes denial of services even in an egalitarian relationship. The sub-conscious message sent out to society is that sex is a service that doesn’t require “being in the mood” on the woman’s part. It is true that within a partnership sometimes one of the partners is not “in the mood” but does it anyway. In that case it is still an act of intimacy and trust done not as a service but as an act of love for the other person. An angry partner might still cook dinner or wash the car, but they won’t have sex.
If sex is a service that can be bought, then rape without injury is simply theft. Date rape is no big deal because the woman isn’t losing anything, an idea that is already prevalent in the minds of many men. Invading a woman’s body is no different than invading her wallet. If you pay for a woman’s dinner, she owes you sex. If she won’t hand it over, taking it is justified.
Women of color, aboriginal women, are over-represented in prostitution particularly in the lower-end. You will be hard-put to find a single organization representing them that is in favor of decriminalization.
Sure there are “happy hookers” or women who claim it as a valid professional choice, but overall this is a job that marginalized women are forced into. In Belize, the government has framed prostitution as a good job for poor women that is the equivalent of migrant farm work for men.
While some men and women may experience sex as a non-intimate act that simply feels good, many see it as an act of intense intimacy, some experience it as both. But almost without exception, on both sides, rape is a devastating personal invasion that haunts the victim.
Sex in exchange for money is not just a job. A pro-decriminalization sex worker posted that workers would have more power to refuse particular services if it were decriminalized. One of the “acts” she mentioned that sex workers didn’t have to do in the past was kissing. It illustrated to me that though they had deadened the reaction to having their bodies invaded it was still there. They wanted to withhold just one small thing that indicated they were not objects, they were feeling human-beings.
The majority of prostitutes have a background that includes one of the following: childhood sexual abuse, other forms of child abuse, drug abuse, or poverty. Legalization legitimizes the use of these people to service the “needs” of men with money and power.
Yes, some women don’t see it that way, just see it as a good way to make money and aren’t at all bothered by it. But are they the majority? Do their individual rights supercede the rights of marginalized women? Does it supercede the rights of women in general to not have their sexuality designated as nothing more than a service that can be sold?