NYT Op-Ed, accessible here.
I am comfortable with the criticism that the vast majority of prostitutes are subject to some form of coercion. However, I question the premise, inherent in editorials like this one, that commercial sex contracts are never victimless transactions. What is it about sexual contact that makes it harmful 100% of the time when exchanged for specific types of consideration?
I wonder how traditional criticisms of prostitution hold up in a culture that has become increasingly comfortable with anonymous sex. The internet is host to dozens (hundreds???) of sites that facillitate consensual, non-commercial anonymous sex. These liasons look very much like a traditional commercial sex transaction, absent financial consideration. I don’t think anyone would have a problem with one party in such a liason offering to cover the travel expenses of the other party. What is it about the presence of profit that makes sexual contact per se exploitative?
Twitter links powered by Tweet This v1.8.3, a WordPress plugin for Twitter.