Exploitation of who?

[Peter van Velzen]

Time and again I stumble over the claim that prostitution en pornography are exploitation of women, and I think I should say something about it because in general it is not true. Prostitution and pornography first of all exploit those who are paying and those are generally men!

It is the consumer who pays, and if anyone is exploited it is him; more so because tendencies are used that originally served to get offspring or build relations, without serving either purpose.

Of course the consumer is not at all after offspring or a relation – certainly not in the case of pornography. (With sex-tourists it is sometimes different). He (yes it can also be a she, buy most of the time it’s a he). Is only after a temporary fulfillment of his desires, while actually that fulfillment is mostly not in his long-term interest and he would be better off with his money still in his pocket and without a venereal disease. (Luckily pornography doesn’t have this particular risk) Whatever may be the case: he pays, and those who pay and do not receive any money are not exploiters.

There are off course male exploiters in the business: First of all the pimps- men who grab most of the money without any major effort. They are truly exploiting the women. No doubt about that. Also the owners of a brothel, will cash far more than the working girls. In porn there are probably also men (and women) who profit greatly without their own body being involved, thought I cannot prove directors cameramen etcetera did not work hard for their money.

But in this line of work, the women usually make a living and it really is against my sense of justice that the ones who pay for it all, the ones that are really exploited are often accused of exploiting the women. I think it is time they realized that indeed they themselves are being exploited. Maybe they will be more wise in the future, when that fact gets thru to them.

(Thought my hopes are not very high. Short time pleasures are hard to resist.)

[Yours]

Peter van Velzen wrote:

Prostitution and pornography first of all exploit those who are paying and those are generally men!

If (wo)men can't control their sexual feelings, they (eventually) are obliged to go to a prostitute.
But no one forces them to do so. So you can't speak about exploitation by prostitutes.

[axxyanus]

Time and again I stumble over the claim that prostitution en pornography are exploitation of women, and I think I should say something about it because in general it is not true. Prostitution and pornography first of all exploit those who are paying and those are generally men!

It is the consumer who pays, and if anyone is exploited it is him; more so because tendencies are used that originally served to get offspring or build relations, without serving either purpose.

I think you are jumping to conclusions. Paying for something doesn't make you the person being exploited. Unless you want to claim all customers are being exploited when they buy something. I also think that the original purpose of sex is irrelevant. I think the case of people smoking being exploited is more solid than the case of men visiting prostitutes or buying pornography.

Of course the consumer is not at all after offspring or a relation – certainly not in the case of pornography. (With sex-tourists it is sometimes different). He (yes it can also be a she, buy most of the time it’s a he). Is only after a temporary fulfillment of his desires, while actually that fulfillment is mostly not in his long-term interest and he would be better off with his money still in his pocket and without a venereal disease. (Luckily pornography doesn’t have this particular risk) Whatever may be the case: he pays, and those who pay and do not receive any money are not exploiters.

This is a non sequitur. Those who pay can be exploiters or collaborating with the exploiters to such a degree that the difference is unimportant. Take the computer and textile industry who have their production mostly in developing countries and mostly close their eyes for the inhuman work circumstances their. I think calling them exploiters even while they pay for the products manufactured their is more or less correct. And yes customers who know about this and still buy these products are cooperating with the exploitation.

But in this line of work, the women usually make a living and it really is against my sense of justice that the ones who pay for it all, the ones that are really exploited are often accused of exploiting the women. I think it is time they realized that indeed they themselves are being exploited. Maybe they will be more wise in the future, when that fact gets thru to them.

Do these man care about the women? If they don't and just want their relief even in the knowlegde that the women are being exploited by others, then they are part of the system.

[Peter van Velzen]

Peter van Velzen wrote:

Prostitution and pornography first of all exploit those who are paying and those are generally men!

If (wo)men can't control their sexual feelings, they (eventually) are obliged to go to a prostitute.
But no one forces them to do so. So you can't speak about exploitation by prostitutes.

Explotation does not imply force as far as I know.
It it did than you would of course be right.

[Peter van Velzen]

I think you are jumping to conclusions. Paying for something doesn't make you the person being exploited. Unless you want to claim all customers are being exploited when they buy something. I also think that the original purpose of sex is irrelevant. I think the case of people smoking being exploited is more solid than the case of men visiting prostitutes or buying pornography.

The negative influence of smoking is indeed more clear, but in my opinion those who pay for sex or porn hardly benefit for what they are buying. In any case they do not make a profit, and without making a profit there is no exploitation at all. So I think I am not jumping to conclusions. For one I do not claim making porn or being a prostitute is morally wrong. Exploitation is not always immoral, but it is always supposed to make a profit.

This is a non sequitur. Those who pay can be exploiters or collaborating with the exploiters to such a degree that the difference is unimportant. Take the computer and textile industry who have their production mostly in developing countries and mostly close their eyes for the inhuman work circumstances their. I think calling them exploiters even while they pay for the products manufactured their is more or less correct. And yes customers who know about this and still buy these products are cooperating with the exploitation.

Those who buy textiles that are – for instance – the product of child labor, do indeed profit financially . As they save money while not losing anything by it. so is this case you are right. But you fail to show how a consumer of either prostitution or profits financially. Maybe you can prove though that marriage would be more expensive than visiting prostitutes. In which case I would have to concede, that bachelors who visit prostitutes are exploiting the benefits of that. But then there would still be no prove that married men who visit a prostitute are exploiting anything, by doing so. You might have a perfect case though that enjoying porn saves money when compared to visiting prostitutes. Still doing neither would still be cheaper.

Another kind of profit is gained by free porn on the internet. But those who do so, actually do not influence the live of the actresses and actors. They are not really part of any “system”.

Do these man care about the women? If they don't and just want their relief even in the knowlegde that the women are being exploited by others, then they are part of the system.

Sometimes they do, sometimes they don’t. There are many examples of men that actually married a prostitute, and I bet there are many men that enjoy porn, who actually love their own wife. The idea that they don’t care about women at all, is really an unproven speculation. OF course there will be many who indeed hardly care at all. But in general most will care at least moderately I presume. I do not know whether anyone has seriously investigated this subject.

I do suspect that those who enjoy porn do not really care for the actresses involved. (They are sort of seen as a mere object) But that is as far as I would dare speculate.

[ChaimNimsky]

Time and again I stumble over the claim that prostitution en pornography are exploitation of women, and I think I should say something about it because in general it is not true. Prostitution and pornography first of all exploit those who are paying and those are generally men!
(...)
But in this line of work, the women usually make a living and it really is against my sense of justice that the ones who pay for it all, the ones that are really exploited are often accused of exploiting the women. I think it is time they realized that indeed they themselves are being exploited. Maybe they will be more wise in the future, when that fact gets thru to them.

(Thought my hopes are not very high. Short time pleasures are hard to resist.)

I tend to disagree. Most often noone is being exploited -- it's just business.
If a client is willing to pay for short term pleasures while women are in full agreement, I don't see any prob. It's merely a deal.
Sometimes, however, people (not only women) are forced against their will or are underaged. IMO, this is where exploitation starts.

[Peter van Velzen]

Time and again I stumble over the claim that prostitution en pornography are exploitation of women, and I think I should say something about it because in general it is not true. Prostitution and pornography first of all exploit those who are paying and those are generally men!
(...)
But in this line of work, the women usually make a living and it really is against my sense of justice that the ones who pay for it all, the ones that are really exploited are often accused of exploiting the women. I think it is time they realized that indeed they themselves are being exploited. Maybe they will be more wise in the future, when that fact gets thru to them.

(Thought my hopes are not very high. Short time pleasures are hard to resist.)

I tend to disagree. Most often noone is being exploited -- it's just business.
If a client is willing to pay for short term pleasures while women are in full agreement, I don't see any prob. It's merely a deal.
Sometimes, however, people (not only women) are forced against their will or are underaged. IMO, this is where exploitation starts.

Technicall all bussines is exploitation. The kind of exploitation that starts when people are forced or underaged, is "the immoral exploitation of people". In that respect - I think - we fully agree.