This crosses into ideological flamewar of the kind we're trying to avoid here. Would you please not do that? Thoughtful discussion is the idea, not denunciatory rhetoric.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

You will find self-described feminists on both sides of this issue.

Well you have conservative and liberal feminists. Anita Sarkeesian is a great example of a conservative, sex-negative feminist who likes to cherry pick facts and video footage to support an anti-sexualized world view of women.

On the other side you have liberal feminists who are sex-positive, for regulated sex work and support Slut Walks.

It's not exactly conservative vs liberal; there are divisions on sex and the nature of being a woman even within the body of radical feminists.

I'm simplifying extraordinarily here, but one position might be "sex between men and women happens within the constraints of a patriarchal society and had inherent power imbalances, which is problematic; sex work is overwhelmingly poor and powerless women being exploited for sex by men" (at its extreme suggesting political lesbianism) and the other might be "there's nothing intrinsically anti-feminist about sex, and we can imagine forms of sex and sex work which are liberatory rather than oppressive. Sex work is often exploitative but is also work, and sex workers are women who deserve a voice and better treatment" (at its extreme leading to explicitly feminist pornography).

I prefer one to the other, but neither position is hypocritical.

These are called SWERF(sex worker exclusionary radical feminists) and is already an existing term in feminism that is currently under serious discussion in general communities if I understand it correctly. If you dislike SWERFs you’re in good (feminist) company.

The idea that men have a right to sex is absurd.

The idea of sex as a human right isn't absurd, just controversial. An example is a severely disabled person unable to find a partner. Criminalizing prostitution between two willing parties, could be seen as restriction of the right to a fundamental human experience.

That's the basis of the argument anyway.

That's the option to pay for it.

Fundamentally you should have the right to do what you want with your body.

> The idea that men have a right to sex is absurd.

All people have a right to sex, so long as it is consensual.

Not right to sex, right to "legally obtain sex even if paid."