RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes

Oli! · **11-06-2015, 04:42 AM**

It's worth noting that this is getting stupid.

Mod Note: User was placed on post moderation for this post.

LiadansWhisper · **11-06-2015, 04:42 AM**

(11-06-2015, 04:35 AM)Verad Wrote: Are there any hidden stipulations in this? I do not mean to accuse of goalpost shifting, but it gets really annoying posting a statistic that meets criteria and then find out, "Oh, well, that doesn't really count because . . . "

I can't remember (sorry, it's really late and I'm very tired) if it was you or someone else who sort of compared the situation to the way LGBT people were treated before the gay rights movement. But then LGBT people organized into activist groups that got together and acted as a large organization. Remember that being gay was illegal, too, for a very long time. I'm talking about groups like ACT UP, GLAD, Lambda, National LGBTQ Task Force, etc. As a group, their representatives could and can definitively say, "We represent more than ourselves." Though, of course, there are a literal plethora of groups representing LGBTQ people. But since they're all organized, how convenient if you look to see what they are advocating for, you can start playing matching games. When every single organization is advocating for similar or the same things, it's pretty easy to say, "Well, it would seem the majority of LGBTQ people feel this way."

Additionally, I know you mentioned earlier that actually putting studies and surveys together is difficult, but I don't think it's impossible. LGBTQ people weren't seen as a significant enough population to pay attention to and actually survey or study on a wide scale until they began to organize and demand rights.

So yeah.

Hyakki · **11-06-2015, 04:43 AM**

(11-06-2015, 04:42 AM)Oli! Wrote: It's worth noting that this is getting stupid.

It was stupid from the start.

Mod Note: User was placed on post moderation for this post.

V'aleera · **11-06-2015, 04:44 AM**

(11-06-2015, 04:42 AM)Oli! Wrote: It's worth noting that this is getting stupid.

Is it worth noting that? This seems like a very subjective assertion.

If a discussion fails to continue to engender your interest, you would be best served by removing yourself from it. If it has deviated from discussing a specific topic of interest, you should post in an attempt to return to that specific topic.

Lydia Lightfoot · **11-06-2015, 04:45 AM**

(11-06-2015, 04:43 AM)Mamushi Wrote:
(11-06-2015, 04:42 AM)Oli! Wrote: It's worth noting that this is getting stupid.

It was stupid from the start.

Agreed.

I'm baffled that an admin of the site gave the thumbs-up to this nonsense.

Mod Note: User was placed on post moderation for this post.

Oli! · **11-06-2015, 04:47 AM**

(11-06-2015, 04:44 AM)V Wrote:
(11-06-2015, 04:42 AM)Oli! Wrote: It's worth noting that this is getting stupid.

Is it worth noting that? This seems like a very subjective assertion.

If a discussion fails to continue to engender your interest, you would be best served by removing yourself from it. If it has deviated from discussing a specific topic of interest, you should post in an attempt to return to that specific topic.

I don't really care about returning to anything.

I care more about reminding people that their points are breaking down into something that's more akin to thread spamming than any sort of constructive something.

Zhavi · **11-06-2015, 04:47 AM**

(11-06-2015, 04:42 AM)LiadansWhisper Wrote:
(11-06-2015, 04:35 AM)Verad Wrote: Are there any hidden stipulations in this? I do not mean to accuse of goalpost shifting, but it gets really annoying posting a statistic that meets criteria and then find out, "Oh, well, that doesn't really count because . . . "

I can't remember (sorry, it's really late and I'm very tired) if it was you or someone else who sort of compared the situation to the way LGBT people were treated before the gay rights movement. But then LGBT people organized into activist groups that got together and acted as a large organization. Remember that being gay was illegal, too, for a very long time. I'm talking about groups like ACT UP, GLAD, Lambda, National LGBTQ Task Force, etc. As a group, their representatives could and can definitively say, "We represent more than ourselves." Though, of course, there are a literal plethora of groups representing LGBTQ people. But since they're all organized, how convenient if you look to see what they are advocating for, you can start playing matching games. When every single organization is advocating for similar or the same things, it's pretty easy to say, "Well, it would seem the majority of LGBTQ people feel this way."

Additionally, I know you mentioned earlier that actually putting studies and surveys together is difficult, but I don't think it's impossible. LGBTQ people weren't seen as a significant enough population to pay attention to and actually survey or study on a wide scale until they began to organize and demand rights.

So yeah.

I agree with this a lot, I do. But do consider that there may be a difference in organizational capacity between being gay and the act of homosexual or non hetero sex being illegal, and being in the sex industry and that being illegal.

the history of sexual freedom movements in the US is really full of stupidity. I mean, bisexual people are still being snubbed by some sexual identity groups because reasons. We are moving forward, but it's slow.

McBeefâ„¢ · **11-06-2015, 04:47 AM**

Holy fuck you people are just running in circles.Â

No one calls a soldier a baby killer because they think it's a "Good synonym."Â

Comparing prostitute to any slur is INCREDIBLY silly because basically no one uses prostitute as a slur.Â

People call prostitutes prostitutes because that's the most technically correct word they know. I have nothing against defining new words and putting them into circulation.Â

I do have an issue with a small subset of a group suddenly saying, "OUR WORD IS THE ONLY WORD YOU CAN USE."

LiadansWhisper · **11-06-2015, 04:50 AM**

(11-06-2015, 04:47 AM)Zhavi Wrote: I agree with this a lot, I do. But do consider that there may be a difference in organizational capacity between being gay and the act of homosexual or non hetero sex being illegal, and being in the sex industry and that being illegal.

the history of sexual freedom movements in the US is really full of stupidity. I mean, bisexual people are still being snubbed by some sexual identity groups because reasons. We are moving forward, but it's slow.

The sex industry doesn't just include prostitution. It also includes porn, phone sex, cam sex, stripping, and in some cases, things like erotic massage (though that can sometimes be seen as a form of prostitution), etc. Additionally, prostitution is legal in Nevada. So to say that they can't organize...I'm not so sure about that. I think they can, if they really have a desire to. But it does not help that many people seem to choose those occupations not necessarily out of a desire to actually do them, but because they see it as their only opportunity.

Verad · **11-06-2015, 04:53 AM**

(11-06-2015, 04:42 AM)LiadansWhisper Wrote:
(11-06-2015, 04:35 AM)Verad Wrote: Are there any hidden stipulations in this? I do not mean to accuse of goalpost shifting, but it gets really annoying posting a statistic that meets criteria and then find out, "Oh, well, that doesn't really count because . . . "

I can't remember (sorry, it's really late and I'm very tired) if it was you or someone else who sort of compared the situation to the way LGBT people were treated before the gay rights movement. Â But then LGBT people organized into activist groups that got together and acted as a large organization. Â Remember that being gay was illegal, too, for a very long time. Â I'm talking about groups like ACT UP, GLAD, Lambda, National LGBTQ Task Force, etc. Â As a group, their representatives could and can definitively say, "We represent more than ourselves." Though, of course, there are a literal plethora of groups representing LGBTQ people. Â But since they're all organized, how convenient if you look to see what they are advocating for, you can start playing matching games. Â When every single organization is advocating for similar or the same things, it's pretty easy to say, "Well, it would seem the majority of LGBTQ people feel this way."

Additionally, I know you mentioned earlier that actually putting studies and surveys together is difficult, but I don't think it's impossible. Â LGBTQ people weren't seen as a significant enough population to pay attention to and actually survey or study on a wide scale until they began to organize and demand rights.

So yeah.

Well if you're looking for a sense that they are organizing in large numbers and demanding similar rights, that doesn't even require a survey. Here is a by-no-means exhaustive list:Â http://www.swaay.org/groups.html. A number of these are specific branches of the larger Sex Worker's Outreach Project.

Now, are these a majority? Do they represent 51% of all active sex workers in their stated regions? Couldn't say. Take that for what you will. But it is definite evidence of organization.

I mention the difficulty of studies not to say none exist - people have been engaging in sociological studies of sex-workers for some time - but the fact that sex work has been so consistently criminalized and stigmatized has until recent decades led to a specific ideological bent in these studies, often along the lines of "What would drive these poor wretches to this, and can we rescue them." The connection of sex work to trafficking in recent decades has also muddied the data - we don't have a clear definition of who is a consensual worker and who is being trafficked.

Kiera Hawkeye · **11-06-2015, 04:54 AM**

(11-06-2015, 04:45 AM)Calliope Cloverbloom Wrote:
(11-06-2015, 04:43 AM)Mamushi Wrote:
(11-06-2015, 04:42 AM)Oli! Wrote: It's worth noting that this is getting stupid.

It was stupid from the start.

Agreed.

I'm baffled that an admin of the site gave the thumbs-up to this nonsense.

It's time for a lockdown! We've said what needs to be said! let this thread live in memory and in a glass case for all to observe and stroke their chins in wonder!

Cactuar

Mod Note: User was placed on post moderation for this post and subsequent posts.

***Teadrinker*** · **11-06-2015, 04:54 AM**

(11-06-2015, 02:43 AM)V Wrote:
(11-06-2015, 02:37 AM)Teadrinker Wrote: I don't use them to slander people. However, if people view the act of accepting gain in exchange for sex as slanderous then...that's on them.

What's your policy on descriptive racial terms?

I will actually go into this but only in NML.

Only darkness will you find in this topic.

V'aleera · **11-06-2015, 04:54 AM**

(11-06-2015, 04:50 AM)LiadansWhisper Wrote: But it does not help that many people seem to choose those occupations not necessarily out of a desire to actually do them, but because they see it as their only opportunity.

Look at the leadership of any civil rights movement and you'll find people who are well-funded and/or well-connected.

The average sex worker is not liable to be either, though increasing access to the internet among the general populace is making the latter gradually easier and certain non-profit groups are assisting with the former to a limited degree.

Verad · **11-06-2015, 04:55 AM**

(11-06-2015, 04:47 AM)McBeefâ„¢ Wrote: Holy fuck you people are just running in circles.Â

No one calls a soldier a baby killer because they think it's a "Good synonym."Â

Comparing prostitute to any slur is INCREDIBLY silly because basically no one uses prostitute as a slur.Â

People call prostitutes prostitutes because that's the most technically correct word they know. I have nothing against defining new words and putting them into circulation.Â

I do have an issue with a small subset of a group suddenly saying, "OUR WORD IS THE ONLY WORD YOU CAN USE."

They use it as a slur whenever they use it as a verb. I'm trying to figure out when somebody accused me of prostituting myself and meant it as a compliment, and I'm hard pressed. Maybe that's an experiential thing.

Zhavi · **11-06-2015, 04:55 AM**

(11-06-2015, 04:50 AM)LiadansWhisper Wrote:
(11-06-2015, 04:47 AM)Zhavi Wrote: I agree with this a lot, I do. But do consider that there may be a difference in organizational capacity between being gay and the act of homosexual or non hetero sex being illegal, and being in the sex industry and that being illegal.

the history of sexual freedom movements in the US is really full of stupidity. I mean, bisexual people are still being snubbed by some sexual identity groups because reasons. We are moving forward, but it's slow.

The sex industry doesn't just include prostitution. It also includes porn, phone sex, cam sex, stripping, and in some cases, things like erotic massage (though that can sometimes be seen as a form of prostitution), etc. Additionally, prostitution is legal in Nevada. So to say that they can't organize...I'm not so sure about that. I think they can, if they really have a desire to. But it does not help that many people seem to choose those occupations not necessarily out of a desire to actually do them, but because they see it as their only opportunity.

...hmm, okay, yeah. I was gonna argue more but there was a genuine reason for gay men and lesbians to not join up with organized groups either, on account of getting beat up or shit on by the law.

But I really hate the social stigma about sex and sexuality. It's so stupid. I once tried to argue with my mother about sex and sexuality, and her response was so rooted in catholic moral high ground -- it was terrifying. Because not only did she think she was objectively right, but she genuinely believed that if she could only get me to agree with her point of view that she could save my soul.

So by being hurtful, and crass, and completely bullheaded to any other way of life, she was helping me.

That's what terrifies me. That's why it's not words that I hold truck with, but lack of education, closed moral values and lack of friendly discourse. Hell, I mean, I see that people think this thread is stupid -- I don't.

Why? Because it makes people talk. It gets the subject on peoples' minds. It exposes people to something that maybe they don't see in their day to day lives. And I think that is incredibly important.

Even if I disagree with the OP. Tongue

« Next Oldest \| Next Newest »
Thread Closed Pages (16): « Previous 1 … 7 8 9 10 11 … 16 Next » Jump to page:

Sex-work and Harmful Language

RPC has moved! These pages have been kept for historical purposes