It seems as though we are going backwards. We were doing so well in realising that all human beings are worthy individuals with emotional and intellectual depth, yet now so many of us don’t seem to see any problem with society encouraging many to reduce themselves to sexual objects. How is this rationalised?

edit: typo

  • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    To the extent that sex workers are objectified, it is a direct result of misogyny, which teaches that it is acceptable to treat women as objects, and capitalism, which teaches that it is acceptable to treat workers as objects. At the confluence of these two industries we find pornography.

    That said, I believe it is possible to do sex work in a way that is liberating and not objectifying, and in my opinion the hyper-fixation on the objectification of women in pornography is itself a result of misogyny in our culture. Every industry objectifies and mistreats workers, so why do we discuss this issue so frequently that the term objectification is practically exclusive to pornography and related contexts? In my view it is because patriarchy requires women to be “pure” and “unsullied” by sex so as to maximize their value to men. The issue gets subconsciously mixed into genuine concerns for the well-being of sex workers. Together these impulses often lead to paternalistic and unhelpful “solutions” like arresting sex workers, or FOSTA and SESTA which claim to be for the protection of sex workers but according to the vast majority I’ve heard speak on this issue are extremely harmful to their livelihood and wellbeing.

    • DontMakeMoreBabies@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      Were you aware of the recent study talking about male microchimerism in the female brain?

      Here it is.

      Your talk about woman needing to remain ‘pure’ because of ‘the patriarchy’ made me think of it.

      I don’t see that they’ve identified any downstream impact from having extra DNA, but wouldn’t it be funny if that actually did impact folks negatively?

      Personally, I’m sure glad I’m not carrying around a historical record of the folks I’ve been ‘very friendly’ with…

      • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        I did read an article on this topic recently and it is very fascinating but I’m not sure I understand that connection to what I was discussing.

        Also, I think I also remembered reading that anyone can have microchimerism acquired through their mothers, so don’t be so sure that you are unaffected.