| I'm glad to see a comment on this issue raising honest points, which is uncommon to see. In 2015, using a lot of tech is far less optional than using pornography and sex workers, which is optional (as in, optional = bool(True)) in every case. For the both the necessary and optional physical products, there should be more involvement in campaigns for favorable trade legislation and worker conditions, and I think we're all guilty of lack of participation in this, which is only made easier by the entrenched influence of the companies involved. From reading a lot of different people, I don't think the feminist advocates for the Nordic model "don't take sex work seriously". I think they identify porn and prostitution as socially harmful to women as a class and physically and psychologically damaging to individaul women in a too-large amount of cases, and would rather see women exit en masse through programs that help them find support and work elsewhere, than anything else -- toward the eventual abolition of prostituion. (I think the opinion is split on whether prostitution is inherently harmful -- that is, in a post-gender world where there is no trance of social definition of women as stores of resources to be extracted for pleasure and service, would prostitution still be socially harmful? -- but I don't think it matters for the questions at hand.) Here are some links to introduce a camp of thought that is never given a chance in the mainstream: http://antipornfeminists.wordpress.com/2013/12/20/qotd-the-p... http://sarahditum.com/2014/02/24/who-do-you-listen-to/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbxBJf9UtWg https://firewomon.wordpress.com/2013/12/08/is-choice-really-... http://www.thepinkcross.org/pinkcross-articles/october-2011/... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9HvC_sEURXA http://www.bad-housekeeping.com/2014/01/08/violence-teenager... http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/oct/24/pornogr... http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~rjensen/freelance/pornographyisale... http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/mar/05/convers... If any of these links are broken, I suggest trying the WayBack Machine. |
I think it does matter - in fact this seems to be exactly the pain-point in this whole thread, that everyone differs on that particular point. If it isn't inherently harmful (and again, I haven't thought about it enough to decide), then your line of argument seems to conflate feminist causes with sex workers', and we'd be trampling over a non-harmful industry just to further the cause of feminism [^].
On the other hand, if it is inherently harmful, there's no need to entangle the two either, and we should legislate against it regardless of whether it damages women as a class or not.
Thanks for all the links.
[^] edit: which may be a legitimate reason, of course. But it would avoid most of the discussion in this subthread.