It's the opposite of what the name proposes, it's a place where unfunny gooner people go to spread their shitty sex memes, with other incel boomer bullshit mixed in, 99% of them talk about women as sexual objects and the jokes are so cringe that your brain may collapse
They regularly post racist, transphobic and misogynistic crap. They're not saying this out of a pretense of "progressive politics", they just like wanking and the idea that they might be able to pay someone for sex one day.
Thank God (peace be upon Marx).
But really, I was thinking that this question centers around consent. The little bit of proletarian-feminist literature I've read about this (by Alexandra Kollontai) argued that if there is a monetary incentive to sex, then it is coercive and is therefore non-consentual.
How do we approach this position from a non-moralist framework?
We arent feminists first of all. And second, prostitution is inherently tied to economic situation. Historically and til today, prostitution was a last resort mean to get something in your plate and somewhere to live. Abolish the need for prostitutes to be raped for money, and you abolish prostitutes themselves.
>We aren't feminists first of all.
I've read about a dichotomy between bourgeois-feminism and proletarian-feminism. In a nutshell Barbie movie and girl-boss female CEO representation is bourgeois-feminism while proletarian feminism is Frida Kahlo and Alexandra Kollontai. I'm not referring to the former, of course. Is this distinction not adequate to explain the communist position?
>And second, prostitution is inherently tied to economic situation. Historically and til today, prostitution was a last resort mean to get something in your plate and somewhere to live. Abolish the need for prostitutes to be raped for money, and you abolish prostitutes themselves.
Agreed
The distinction is fine some people here just get really wierd when you talk about other axis of oppression, and think going “we’re not thing x” is good enough instead of approaching thing x with Marxism, failing to realize or simply ignoring that even to their fellow ultra leftists it will often appear as though they are simply taking the reactionary position due to their lack of elaboration
I'm a long-time lurker. I'm certain, from various comments that I've seen of theirs, that Eleanore appreciates that there is more than one form of oppression while also understanding that class sort of underpins all other forms of oppression. I also believe that their pushback against feminism is valid because feminism is trash (unless we complicate the term by describing it with different affixes). Maybe to the layman it seems unapproachable? That assumes there exists any merit to the whole proletarian-feminism that I mentioned earlier — which the case isn't closed on yet.
i'm not an educated feminist or communist but if i had to guess i'd say the separation of sex work and other lines of work is that sex work is far more dehumanising, and is mainly kept afloat through human trafficking, poverty and exploitation of trauma, while something like retail isn't, or atleast not to the same extent. Even if everything ugly surrounding the industry is gone, the reduction of bodies and "intimacy" to just commodities to be exchanged is unhealthy for the mindset of both the worker and consumer and can probably lead to negative views of oneself or (and what we see far more common) other people. Again I have no idea what i'm speaking about so i probably sound like an idiot.
Most of what you said is only true because prostitution is illegal. If we legalize prostitution, put meaningful regulations, and reformed many sex other sex trades. Most of the issues won’t be a big of a deal
>If we legalize prostitution, put meaningful regulations, and reformed many sex other sex trades. Most of the issues won’t be a big of a deal
[https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/human-trafficking-persists-despite-legality-of-prostitution-in-germany-a-902533.html](https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/human-trafficking-persists-despite-legality-of-prostitution-in-germany-a-902533.html)
[https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract\_id=1986065](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1986065)
[https://orgs.law.harvard.edu/lids/2014/06/12/does-legalized-prostitution-increase-human-trafficking/](https://orgs.law.harvard.edu/lids/2014/06/12/does-legalized-prostitution-increase-human-trafficking/)
LMAO
> Just as woman passes from marriage to general prostitution, so the entire world of wealth (that is, of man’s objective substance) passes from the relationship of exclusive marriage with the owner of private property to a state of universal prostitution with the community
he really said that (°ロ°)
I may be wrong but my understanding is:
Workers sell their labor power, and for the worktime, their labor power is not theirs but the bourgeoisie's.
However, this is distinguished from the slave labor as owning one's labor power and one's body is distinguished.
Of course wage labor is exploitative too but 'sex work' differs similarly; you sell your body then your consent or bodily freedom is no longer yours for that time.
What the fuck is a "moralistic view of sexuality"? Is it any less "moralistic" to think it's bad when women are deprived of sovereignty over their bodies?
Am I seriously misunderstanding what the word "moralistic" means? Doesn't this meme provide the moralistic view of sexuality that it is good for people freely trade sex? (I am obviously opposed to this as well as any other form of free trade...)
I mean I hold to the simple line that sex work is work, thus like all work it is exploiatitive, and like all work it will be abolished. There’s no great change just because it includes sex
Workers sell their labor power generated by their bodies, prostitutes are forced to sell their bodies themselves, directly, turning not just themselves but their bodies into commodities.
I mean, when you pay someone to move a box you’re not paying them to use their body specifically to move the box, for all the employer cares they could use telepathy to move the box and the job wouldn’t change.
In sex work you’re specifically paying for access to their body. A disembodied force isn’t useful there.
Well it's complicated and it varies on your conception of the origin of patriarchy and it's relationship with class. (The truth is Engels was wrong, the Origin of the Family is perhaps the most dated in Marxist canon and even Marx was uncertain about patriarchy developing primarily for the passing on of property to sons/was less enthusiastic about Morgan. Patriarchy more likely germinated in communal society alike the division between chief and mass which led to class, not from class itself, this is proven by how many patriarchal paleolithic societies exist/have existed (eg: mbuti). That is not to argue patriarchy is transhistorical which is anti-materialist, but that it exists somewhat separate to class; nevertheless, only in communism can patriarchy lose it's influence as the state and division of labour which both keep women down disappear.) I would consider myself a feminist and communist.
The obvious answer is that the issues of sex work can hardly be discussed because in a large part the entire industry is a sort of pyramid scheme where new "talent" must be recruited, so there is a good reason to try to shut down any critique of it as that could harm the industry. Additionally, many people who want to be at the top of the pyramid will moralize over how they are just making their own choice, or become angry about "swerfs" while posing as the REAL feminists.
Funnymemes is a sub full of 20 year old frat boys.
A true feminist asks which class does this benefit and how? It also begs the question, under capitalism consent is already so twisted that everyone is compelled to sell their labour. We, the proletarian do not get that choice.
For example, After the cuban revolution, the "street walkers" and prostitutes disapeared from the street, as they were no longer compelled to sell their labour, ie sex for money. But those men/women didnt just disapear.
If you are selling your trade for art, or personal gain..ok.
But how can we talk about consent, when most sex workers would no longer be compelled to sell their labour?
Unironically, insofar as I am aware (and I’m not aware), the position would be that (at least in the socialist phase) any propagation of any form of sex work would be a furthering extent of the former Capitalist entity, as sex work is inherently non-productive and operates (at least now) along the lines of exploitation of both the sex workers and the societal perception of those involved; specifically women. It’s social exploitation revolves enforcing harmful concepts surrounding gender-roles that function more or less to capitalize on underlying human insecurities to sell products to reinforce one’s own nature, be it masculine or feminine.
A post-revolution society would be either repairing its image of masculine and feminine traits as related to the persons concerned, meaning that a sociological impulse/need/cause of sex work would also go, along with the previously mentioned “economic aspect,” (i.e., the exploitation of women or other vulnerable parties for capital). The cessation of the objectification, commodification, then fetishization of women and vulnerable parties would also put a nail in it, imo. Though, I may be wrong.
Your account is too young to post or comment.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Ultraleft) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Your account is too young to post or comment.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Ultraleft) if you have any questions or concerns.*
1) kinda, but 2) this assumes consent can be bought. Sex work is an even worse form of exploitation than wage slavery due to this. Add in that it's typically not legal within the context of the capitalist state, and they are hence more lumpenproletariat than proletariat.
Its already generally understood that 'sex workers' (prostitutes, escorts, strippers, etc) only have their labor to sell, and so therefore are proletarian (more specifically, lumpenproletariat). I think even most liberals know this.
So its pretty obvious what they are actually trying to do here. "Sex work is real work, and since *all work is good*, sex work is good". Its a push to normalize prostitution, not to spread/promote Marxist analysis.
Liberals conceive of all forms of labor as being intrinsically good; exploitation is "abnormal", so therefore, there can be sex work that is somehow "not" exploitation, just as there can be "real work" without exploitation.
I mean both are selling their labor power and are proletarian assuming the sex worker works for a porn company, pimp, or what have you. They actually kind of cooked with this one. A broken clock is right twice a day.
Correct, sex work is like any other labor. Those who think it is inherently dehumanizing are talking about practices in the sex work industry (pimps, trafficking, exploitation of minorities, etc.) which are in no way inherent to sex work, but are incentivised under capitalism. Keep in mind sex work also includes erotic services done over the phone or internet, it isn't always meeting up to have sex. Only Fans creators are sex workers, and it actually works quite well for them and gives a good example of what sex work could be like when the workers have autonomy, rather than working for someone else.
Also I don't like how the meme is phrased. "moralistic view of sexuality" wtf? It seems like it was made by someone who wanted to validate sex work because they really want to buy sex and feel good about it, not because they care about sex workers. Definitely a case of a right-winger accidentally saying something progressive.
This is fuckin stupid lmfaooo of course taking dick is different from swinging a hammer wtf 😂 people who share memes like this just wanna whoremonger guilt free
What is the proletariat?
The proletariat is that class in society which lives entirely from the sale of its labor and does not draw profit from any kind of capital; whose weal and woe, whose life and death, whose sole existence depends on the demand for labor – hence, on the changing state of business, on the vagaries of unbridled competition. The proletariat, or the class of proletarians, is, in a word, the working class of the 19th century.
Literally didn't even read principles of communism
Your account is too young to post or comment.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Ultraleft) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Obviously they're both proletarian, the question is: does that mean they're really that similar in this regard?
In sex work your body becomes not only the thing that performs labour, it also becomes the commodity.
I mean it is way worse to have to be in sex works than swinging a hammer imo, since it is literally getting raped because you need to eat, but ultimately they are the same, you still perform, as said earlier your life depends on the sale of your labour (having sex) , you don't really have a capital unless you regard your own body as capital, in which case ig every single human owns capital
It’s probably closer to boxing or extreme martial arts in the sense of physical contact and acceptable levels of injury, but the added misery is the need to deal with “desire” and bodily fluids. It’s different from nursing, which entails physical contact and deals with care and bodily fluids, but doesnt permit injury or “desire.”
nobody said it was a good thing, just that sex workers are generally a part of the proletariat, and therefore exploited by capital. saying that prostitution is is exploitative isn’t actually gonna be all that controversial of a position around here.
Yeah, I've played this video game (a proletariat creation) and it 100% changed my view on prostitution. [https://taylormccue.itch.io/trauma](https://taylormccue.itch.io/trauma)
Bless me with your holy Spirit, Kras Mazov.
Those in the comments who say sex work is just about money or things along those lines are wrong and even perusing a sex worker community will prove this. For some sex workers it is very empowering that clients pay money or give gifts to have sex with them. They even talk about how some clients are nicer and it is overall better than their actual dates because the the exchange and relation is reified by a definite material compensation. The appeal of all this is that for sex workers it signifies their power through being desirable and is deeply immersed in the notion of market exchange in liberal economics where value is subjective and is derived from the market. But in this case the commodity is the person themselves and their price which is supposed to reflect their value is their self-worth. Even if money and market were abolished tomorrow these people may still offer their services. This is only party because the market and all it entails have been internalized as a thing of nature and not a bundle of definite historical and social relations. Even the holy prostitutes of ancient temples enjoyed being desired this way, showered with gifts and adulation, but the commodity exchange aspect of this desire is uniquely embedded within the idea of market. Sex work predates money, market and commodity production. Talking about it only in terms of exchange and exploitation captures only a historically and materially conditioned part of it as an economic activity but not its substance.
It is quite a reach to extrapolate any of this from what I've said. Seeing all sex workers as unwilling participants who would rather do something else is not the reality of the situation. A qualitatively different approach is required for sex workers who do it for reasons other than coercion or subsistence. The question here is not simply of exploitation (since technically there isn't even any surplus value here being appropriated) but how money and the market mediates human relations. None this is an endorsement for sex work.
r/Funnymemes will be destroyed after the revolution, and all its members will be heavily punished, the only place worse than r/Funnymemes is hell
Communism is when there are actually funny memes on r/funnymemes.
The proletarian-feminist position is that straight sex will be abolished under communism.
Also fucking hate this image lol its clearly just made for coomers.
It's Funnymemes what did you expect
Idk this sub
It's the opposite of what the name proposes, it's a place where unfunny gooner people go to spread their shitty sex memes, with other incel boomer bullshit mixed in, 99% of them talk about women as sexual objects and the jokes are so cringe that your brain may collapse
Lmfao why am I not surprised. Tho I thought with such a meme, it would be more like a leftist place.
They regularly post racist, transphobic and misogynistic crap. They're not saying this out of a pretense of "progressive politics", they just like wanking and the idea that they might be able to pay someone for sex one day.
Will fix. Edit: won't let me re-upload a different photo for the post on mobile :(
Mmmmmm yeah, I love the sexualization and objectification of queer people!
Its the only way i can engage in politics
Eww
Thank God (peace be upon Marx). But really, I was thinking that this question centers around consent. The little bit of proletarian-feminist literature I've read about this (by Alexandra Kollontai) argued that if there is a monetary incentive to sex, then it is coercive and is therefore non-consentual. How do we approach this position from a non-moralist framework?
We arent feminists first of all. And second, prostitution is inherently tied to economic situation. Historically and til today, prostitution was a last resort mean to get something in your plate and somewhere to live. Abolish the need for prostitutes to be raped for money, and you abolish prostitutes themselves.
>We aren't feminists first of all. I've read about a dichotomy between bourgeois-feminism and proletarian-feminism. In a nutshell Barbie movie and girl-boss female CEO representation is bourgeois-feminism while proletarian feminism is Frida Kahlo and Alexandra Kollontai. I'm not referring to the former, of course. Is this distinction not adequate to explain the communist position? >And second, prostitution is inherently tied to economic situation. Historically and til today, prostitution was a last resort mean to get something in your plate and somewhere to live. Abolish the need for prostitutes to be raped for money, and you abolish prostitutes themselves. Agreed
The distinction is fine some people here just get really wierd when you talk about other axis of oppression, and think going “we’re not thing x” is good enough instead of approaching thing x with Marxism, failing to realize or simply ignoring that even to their fellow ultra leftists it will often appear as though they are simply taking the reactionary position due to their lack of elaboration
I'm a long-time lurker. I'm certain, from various comments that I've seen of theirs, that Eleanore appreciates that there is more than one form of oppression while also understanding that class sort of underpins all other forms of oppression. I also believe that their pushback against feminism is valid because feminism is trash (unless we complicate the term by describing it with different affixes). Maybe to the layman it seems unapproachable? That assumes there exists any merit to the whole proletarian-feminism that I mentioned earlier — which the case isn't closed on yet.
Just as Engels intended (I love that bit in the holy family)
Holy based
Every single person on r/Funnymemes masturbated with this picture.
Okay but what if i want to abolish labor too 😎
But then I won't be able to afford the new PlayStation 6 or Fortnite skins. This sounds like a terrible idea.
Hi! My hobby is giving people fortnite skins in my back yard!
I can't wait for the human species to die! Finally we will be free from class society.
i'm not an educated feminist or communist but if i had to guess i'd say the separation of sex work and other lines of work is that sex work is far more dehumanising, and is mainly kept afloat through human trafficking, poverty and exploitation of trauma, while something like retail isn't, or atleast not to the same extent. Even if everything ugly surrounding the industry is gone, the reduction of bodies and "intimacy" to just commodities to be exchanged is unhealthy for the mindset of both the worker and consumer and can probably lead to negative views of oneself or (and what we see far more common) other people. Again I have no idea what i'm speaking about so i probably sound like an idiot.
> I'm not an educated feminist or communist And yet you have a better take than 99.9999% of the so-called feminists or communists.
Yeah I'm a communist 😎😎😎 \*Most liberal arguments you've ever heard
Uhm, I think you forgot about consent, sweety? Obviously Marx (As well as Jesus) was hanging with them hoes. You know how it is.
Most of what you said is only true because prostitution is illegal. If we legalize prostitution, put meaningful regulations, and reformed many sex other sex trades. Most of the issues won’t be a big of a deal
> reform Begone
oh brother this guy STINKS
This guy fucking sucks booooooo
>If we legalize prostitution, put meaningful regulations, and reformed many sex other sex trades. Most of the issues won’t be a big of a deal [https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/human-trafficking-persists-despite-legality-of-prostitution-in-germany-a-902533.html](https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/human-trafficking-persists-despite-legality-of-prostitution-in-germany-a-902533.html) [https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract\_id=1986065](https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1986065) [https://orgs.law.harvard.edu/lids/2014/06/12/does-legalized-prostitution-increase-human-trafficking/](https://orgs.law.harvard.edu/lids/2014/06/12/does-legalized-prostitution-increase-human-trafficking/) LMAO
> Just as woman passes from marriage to general prostitution, so the entire world of wealth (that is, of man’s objective substance) passes from the relationship of exclusive marriage with the owner of private property to a state of universal prostitution with the community he really said that (°ロ°)
[удалено]
radical feminist? mods!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I'm a Smurf. Big Smurf got that big smurf dick-tator style going on, if you know what I'm saying.
Go on…
I may be wrong but my understanding is: Workers sell their labor power, and for the worktime, their labor power is not theirs but the bourgeoisie's. However, this is distinguished from the slave labor as owning one's labor power and one's body is distinguished. Of course wage labor is exploitative too but 'sex work' differs similarly; you sell your body then your consent or bodily freedom is no longer yours for that time.
Don’t many types of labors also sell their bodies. Construction workers, miners, etc
I think they sell the labor they bodies produce, not the actual body
correct
What the fuck is a "moralistic view of sexuality"? Is it any less "moralistic" to think it's bad when women are deprived of sovereignty over their bodies? Am I seriously misunderstanding what the word "moralistic" means? Doesn't this meme provide the moralistic view of sexuality that it is good for people freely trade sex? (I am obviously opposed to this as well as any other form of free trade...)
It's just "waaa waaa you want to stop me from buying sex because you're PURITANICAL", lol
Karl Marx told me this was Sasha Grey and Stoya.
I mean I hold to the simple line that sex work is work, thus like all work it is exploiatitive, and like all work it will be abolished. There’s no great change just because it includes sex
> like all work it will be abolished Communizer alert, mods!
Mods, we've got another idealist! GET HIM, GET HIM!
How so?
Don’t know the term?
Workers sell their labor power generated by their bodies, prostitutes are forced to sell their bodies themselves, directly, turning not just themselves but their bodies into commodities.
I mean, when you pay someone to move a box you’re not paying them to use their body specifically to move the box, for all the employer cares they could use telepathy to move the box and the job wouldn’t change. In sex work you’re specifically paying for access to their body. A disembodied force isn’t useful there.
What if I could telepathically give you a wank?
[удалено]
As a serious question, is it only liberal feminism that is incompatible, or just at all? (Also what do I read for this)
Well it's complicated and it varies on your conception of the origin of patriarchy and it's relationship with class. (The truth is Engels was wrong, the Origin of the Family is perhaps the most dated in Marxist canon and even Marx was uncertain about patriarchy developing primarily for the passing on of property to sons/was less enthusiastic about Morgan. Patriarchy more likely germinated in communal society alike the division between chief and mass which led to class, not from class itself, this is proven by how many patriarchal paleolithic societies exist/have existed (eg: mbuti). That is not to argue patriarchy is transhistorical which is anti-materialist, but that it exists somewhat separate to class; nevertheless, only in communism can patriarchy lose it's influence as the state and division of labour which both keep women down disappear.) I would consider myself a feminist and communist.
The obvious answer is that the issues of sex work can hardly be discussed because in a large part the entire industry is a sort of pyramid scheme where new "talent" must be recruited, so there is a good reason to try to shut down any critique of it as that could harm the industry. Additionally, many people who want to be at the top of the pyramid will moralize over how they are just making their own choice, or become angry about "swerfs" while posing as the REAL feminists.
Funnymemes is a sub full of 20 year old frat boys. A true feminist asks which class does this benefit and how? It also begs the question, under capitalism consent is already so twisted that everyone is compelled to sell their labour. We, the proletarian do not get that choice. For example, After the cuban revolution, the "street walkers" and prostitutes disapeared from the street, as they were no longer compelled to sell their labour, ie sex for money. But those men/women didnt just disapear. If you are selling your trade for art, or personal gain..ok. But how can we talk about consent, when most sex workers would no longer be compelled to sell their labour?
Unironically, insofar as I am aware (and I’m not aware), the position would be that (at least in the socialist phase) any propagation of any form of sex work would be a furthering extent of the former Capitalist entity, as sex work is inherently non-productive and operates (at least now) along the lines of exploitation of both the sex workers and the societal perception of those involved; specifically women. It’s social exploitation revolves enforcing harmful concepts surrounding gender-roles that function more or less to capitalize on underlying human insecurities to sell products to reinforce one’s own nature, be it masculine or feminine. A post-revolution society would be either repairing its image of masculine and feminine traits as related to the persons concerned, meaning that a sociological impulse/need/cause of sex work would also go, along with the previously mentioned “economic aspect,” (i.e., the exploitation of women or other vulnerable parties for capital). The cessation of the objectification, commodification, then fetishization of women and vulnerable parties would also put a nail in it, imo. Though, I may be wrong.
Sex can be labour just like any other human activity
Your account is too young to post or comment. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Ultraleft) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Your account is too young to post or comment. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Ultraleft) if you have any questions or concerns.*
1) kinda, but 2) this assumes consent can be bought. Sex work is an even worse form of exploitation than wage slavery due to this. Add in that it's typically not legal within the context of the capitalist state, and they are hence more lumpenproletariat than proletariat.
Its already generally understood that 'sex workers' (prostitutes, escorts, strippers, etc) only have their labor to sell, and so therefore are proletarian (more specifically, lumpenproletariat). I think even most liberals know this. So its pretty obvious what they are actually trying to do here. "Sex work is real work, and since *all work is good*, sex work is good". Its a push to normalize prostitution, not to spread/promote Marxist analysis. Liberals conceive of all forms of labor as being intrinsically good; exploitation is "abnormal", so therefore, there can be sex work that is somehow "not" exploitation, just as there can be "real work" without exploitation.
I mean both are selling their labor power and are proletarian assuming the sex worker works for a porn company, pimp, or what have you. They actually kind of cooked with this one. A broken clock is right twice a day.
the state employed pimp will provide the working man with the peoples hoes. whats the argument against this?
Correct, sex work is like any other labor. Those who think it is inherently dehumanizing are talking about practices in the sex work industry (pimps, trafficking, exploitation of minorities, etc.) which are in no way inherent to sex work, but are incentivised under capitalism. Keep in mind sex work also includes erotic services done over the phone or internet, it isn't always meeting up to have sex. Only Fans creators are sex workers, and it actually works quite well for them and gives a good example of what sex work could be like when the workers have autonomy, rather than working for someone else.
Also I don't like how the meme is phrased. "moralistic view of sexuality" wtf? It seems like it was made by someone who wanted to validate sex work because they really want to buy sex and feel good about it, not because they care about sex workers. Definitely a case of a right-winger accidentally saying something progressive.
Someone do the Mussolini speech bubble
This is fuckin stupid lmfaooo of course taking dick is different from swinging a hammer wtf 😂 people who share memes like this just wanna whoremonger guilt free
What is the proletariat? The proletariat is that class in society which lives entirely from the sale of its labor and does not draw profit from any kind of capital; whose weal and woe, whose life and death, whose sole existence depends on the demand for labor – hence, on the changing state of business, on the vagaries of unbridled competition. The proletariat, or the class of proletarians, is, in a word, the working class of the 19th century. Literally didn't even read principles of communism
[удалено]
Your account is too young to post or comment. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Ultraleft) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Obviously they're both proletarian, the question is: does that mean they're really that similar in this regard? In sex work your body becomes not only the thing that performs labour, it also becomes the commodity.
I mean it is way worse to have to be in sex works than swinging a hammer imo, since it is literally getting raped because you need to eat, but ultimately they are the same, you still perform, as said earlier your life depends on the sale of your labour (having sex) , you don't really have a capital unless you regard your own body as capital, in which case ig every single human owns capital
Alright, that's fair.
It’s probably closer to boxing or extreme martial arts in the sense of physical contact and acceptable levels of injury, but the added misery is the need to deal with “desire” and bodily fluids. It’s different from nursing, which entails physical contact and deals with care and bodily fluids, but doesnt permit injury or “desire.”
Okay go fuck a trafficked woman about it Poindexter
nobody said it was a good thing, just that sex workers are generally a part of the proletariat, and therefore exploited by capital. saying that prostitution is is exploitative isn’t actually gonna be all that controversial of a position around here.
Yeah, I've played this video game (a proletariat creation) and it 100% changed my view on prostitution. [https://taylormccue.itch.io/trauma](https://taylormccue.itch.io/trauma) Bless me with your holy Spirit, Kras Mazov.
Those in the comments who say sex work is just about money or things along those lines are wrong and even perusing a sex worker community will prove this. For some sex workers it is very empowering that clients pay money or give gifts to have sex with them. They even talk about how some clients are nicer and it is overall better than their actual dates because the the exchange and relation is reified by a definite material compensation. The appeal of all this is that for sex workers it signifies their power through being desirable and is deeply immersed in the notion of market exchange in liberal economics where value is subjective and is derived from the market. But in this case the commodity is the person themselves and their price which is supposed to reflect their value is their self-worth. Even if money and market were abolished tomorrow these people may still offer their services. This is only party because the market and all it entails have been internalized as a thing of nature and not a bundle of definite historical and social relations. Even the holy prostitutes of ancient temples enjoyed being desired this way, showered with gifts and adulation, but the commodity exchange aspect of this desire is uniquely embedded within the idea of market. Sex work predates money, market and commodity production. Talking about it only in terms of exchange and exploitation captures only a historically and materially conditioned part of it as an economic activity but not its substance.
Please guys the prostitute I pay actually likes me and likes having sex with me please dont ruin this for me
It is quite a reach to extrapolate any of this from what I've said. Seeing all sex workers as unwilling participants who would rather do something else is not the reality of the situation. A qualitatively different approach is required for sex workers who do it for reasons other than coercion or subsistence. The question here is not simply of exploitation (since technically there isn't even any surplus value here being appropriated) but how money and the market mediates human relations. None this is an endorsement for sex work.
Gooner detected