> From: Ritu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Well, after reading one of the mails in this thread yesterday, I > wouldn't say 'necessarily', but I would still say 'highly likely'. And > the reason would be that that is what most of us tend to do with most of > the people who provide us with services. [I, for instance, must rate > rather high on callousness index as I don't really care about my > doctor's or dentists's needs and pleasures - all I care about is their > competence and skill.] I see no reason to believe that there is a sudden > wellspring of personal interest when the service is sexual in nature.
LOL, yes, you are well known for your callousness, you are clearly blessed with a heart of stone!. And I bet you do care about your Doctors needs, in some small way at least, by being polite and making small talk etc, as does one in any such interactions. I get the feeling we are all being armchair experts here. It would be best if we listened to one who had some experience in such matters. I have no doubt there are women (and perhaps men) who are pushed into prostitution, either by force, or by economic necessity. Equally, there are some who choose it, of their own free will. Perhaps if we all chipped in $5, we could book an hour or two for discussions with someone who knew :) As with all such things, I doubt there are any hard and fast rules, I imagine there are some suicidally miserable prostitutes, as well as some blissfully happy ones. To ban it would deprive many people, often poor uneducated people, with few other prospects, of their only source of income. I wonder what a poll of pro's, asking them if they want their jobs made illegal would return. I doubt it would be a resounding yes. > > As for the other jobs, well, a certain degree of objectification is > inherent in all forms of employment, isn't it? We call it being > professional. > > > That is, a prostitute when plying > > his/her trade is no more an object than I am when I'm teaching > > (college! no one panic!), editing or writing. > > Well, I'd have said that while your students and readers must > undoubtedly be objectifying you, you are a person when you are teaching > or writing. But no, there wouldn't be any difference in the degree of > objectification. The difference, imo, lies in the fact that sex is a > rather intimate act, and near-constant objectification in this sphere > seems likely to have a negative effect on a person's self-esteem. > > I am not trying to deny the impact of negative social and religious > attitudes on a prostitute's self-esteem/ self-image. But even if these > two factors were to be removed [as was the case with the dev-dasis in > the beginning - they had both the religious sanction and social > respect], it still seems like a trade which doesn't really lend itself > to a lot of enthusiastic approval from the practitioners themselves. I am not so sure, I think perhaps we are all being a little precious about sex here. It has been a business for a long time, I doubt many of the prostitutes seek the same things from sex as we do. I imagine there is at least a degree of enthusiasm when the money changes hands. > Perhaps it is because we are taught to value the products of the mind > more than the products of the body, perhaps it is because of the nature > of sex, perhaps the reason is an amalgam of many different factors....In > any case, I thought it was a point worth considering. > Yes, it is, and it is complex. Hence I doubt we, as non-practitioners, are really in any position to make meaningful statements about it. And, for fear of both bankruptcy and the moral abyss, I intend to keep my day job for now. > > So again: How does paying for sex automatically make the sex partner > > an object? > > See above, at least for why I think that when one pays for sex, one is > likely to treat the sex provider as an object. > > I'd like to ask you something now - why do you think that it doesn't? > Have you come across any accounts from people engaged in the trade in > which they say that they don't feel like objects when they ply their > trade? Or do you have any reason to believe that a majority of the > people who visit prostitutes do not view/treat them in that manner? I am > not asking merely for the sake of being argumentative - I am curious > about your reasons for questioning the statement. > Well, I can't speak for Warren, but I guess I was objecting to the holier-than-thou tone of the debate. No, I don't think they will all burn in hell for all eternity, and I think it would be a) stupid, b) pointless, c) in an odd and no doubt misguided way, a denial of a women's right to choose if we were to attempt to eradicate it. As for the object bit... well, like I said, I don't think we can judge. In my very limited experience, that did not seem to be the case. But then, for some, I am sure it is. And it being Monday, I must point out, that an object is just how I felt when I had to get up to go to work this morning. I, Object Maru _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
