And for every one of those reports there is another of sex workers who find it empowering, profitable, and maybe even fun

Surely that ratio is much higher than 1:1. The amount of camgirls having "fun" and independently successful escorts has to be relatively small compared to the amount of average sex workers, many of whom didn't exactly choose that life and don't find it to be very "empowering".

Not sure if much higher. I do photography and spent time snapping (street photos!) some girls in the sex industry in Asia. For them it's mainly about money. They could get an office job but they - and I quote - "tried...don't like".

These are countries with low unemployment, but also low pay, so sex work appeals as a lucrative (and less boring) alternative.

Many of this women were single mothers and the money was sent home. Few, from what I could tell, used drugs. And all were very strong people - I think that line of work requires it.

So in some parts of the world prostitution is just another job.

Is this the same everywhere? Unfortunately not. And I'm sure the industry as a whole is filled with tales of sorrow.

Isn't that similar to all those people that wake up at 6 every morning to do the lowest of the lowest of jobs? The only difference is that their work is not related to sex.

Heaven forbid that someone actually enjoy the work they do with their bodies... or have we forgotten that all these activities are rooted in the giving and receiving of pleasure?

There are advocacy groups out there campaigning for sex workers' rights, staffed by sex workers and former sex workers, and I would think that if the profession were really so bad for independent providers then groups like this either wouldn't exist or would have a very different character.

Why should you (or anyone else) have the right to decide that for them? It should be their decision.

That is an extreme case, and I hope that she gets another line of work more suited to her.

But lets not forget that most people aren't happy being cleaners, servers, etc and do it entirely for the money. Nothing wrong with that, but in this world only a very small group is happy enough to love their job (and most people love only a part of it).

Change "heroin" to "cocaine" and you could tell the same story about many stockbrokers, so what's the point?

Brokers typically have social mobility, and a choice in their type of work. Their sacrifice to make ends meet is incomparable to that of someone selling their body. I'm confused how you can draw a likeness between the two. Perhaps there are moral threads to pull, but I don't think they end up going to the same place.

The way you imply that "selling their body" is worse than selling whatever part of themselves a stockbroker sells while doing drugs in order to work, really is kind of part of the problem. You put a moral judgement over which activity is more degrading than another. Consider this: what if people we're entitled to do whatever they want with their body, without having to abide to your standards and morals? How much of other peoples' morality do you want to be subjected to? Beware that others may have wildly different visions on what is degrading and what is not.

Jesus Christ... It's almost certainly worse subjectively (seriously, how many stockbrokers would describe their line of work as degrading, compared to prostitutes!?) and objectively in terms of massively increased risks in terms of mental and physical health, exposure to sexual violence as well as facing ostracism from family, friends and society as a whole.

Everybody has a choice in their type of work, nobody is forced to be a prostitute. Yes most prostitutes probably don't enjoy it, but they put up with it because the money is generally many multiples more than whatever they'd make at an office job and the hours are more flexible.

If someone feels like they don't have any other job opportunities, then making prostitution illegal certainly won't fix that problem (nor does it eliminate prostitution - prostitution exists everywhere, making it illegal just means a prostitute can't go to the police if a customer takes advantage of her).

Policing prostitution is a complete waste of taxpayer money.

i'm not sure on what planet you are living or you think you live.

> Everybody has a choice in their type of work, nobody is forced to be a prostitute.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochdale_child_sex_abuse_ring

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploit...

People are forced into sex work all the time, everywhere on the planet including in rich western countries, by various means,debt, violence,death threats,the "boyfriend" who is a pimp, even "curse" threats, especially young kids, and most johns don't give a damn. Women who refuse to submit to their pimps or the mafia are killed to set an example.

Obviously forced child prostitution and trafficking happens, nobody is denying that or defending such a repulsive practice, just like nobody denies or defends slavery or forced labor. If you actually read the comment I was responding to you'd see that we were talking about sex work in general.

Why the hell can we not have a real conversation about sex work among consenting adults without somebody conflating it with slavery and child prostitution?

It's already illegal. How would making it legal make things worse for her?

If you are really concerned about the horrors of prostitution, I recommend you work on the Glass Ceiling issue in non sex worker industries so women have more real options for well paid work.

At what rate do you think women are driven into prostitution because they hit a glass ceiling in their previous line of work?

Versus, you know, never getting off the ground floor?

I have six years of college, including a Certificate in GIS. I worked at a Fortune 500 company for over 5 years. The only person at the company who knew what GIS was without me having to explain it was a senior programmer who asked me for a date, thereby making it vastly less likely that I could ever successfully get a job in his department.

I've been a member of HN for over 9 years. I spent nearly 6 of it homeless. I have been quite open about hoping to make professional connections here and thereby improve my finances. I've made damn little progress on that goal. HN has not proven to be a good means for me to network.

While homeless, there were a number of men who offered me money to sleep with them or asked if I needed a place to stay (the implication being I could stay with them in exchange for sex).

I've talked about this many times on HN. If I didn't have a serious medical condition making sex work a non starter for me, I likely would have long ago given up on finding another solution because I'm still dirt poor.

I was one of the top three students of my graduating class in high school and I won a National Merit Scholarship. I don't lack talent. But most men don't really want to talk to me in earnest unless they are looking for a sexual relationship. It has proven to be a tremendous barrier to resolving my financial problems and rejoining the middle class.

Having visited the Bay Area, I found it a ruthless place to live in.

That’s why I never left Romania. The cost of life here is manageable enough that the possibility of me becoming homeless is practically zero. And it’s not SF, but we do have some startups and software companies here and I can work remotely too.

Given the trouble you’re facing, as an unsolicited advice, wouldn’t it be better for you if you moved someplace where the cost of life is lower?

Personally I find it incredible how highly skilled people in the US, especially in California, can become homeless.

I've known many more or less unemployable people who started contributing to significant open source projects, and based on that got hired to well paid positions.

Thank you. That's both encouraging and a useful tidbit to help me find a path forward.

.

Overlooking the horrendous message that no one should have any sympathy for a (formerly) homeless American because there are people who have it worse, are you telling me you see zero connection between my difficulties and these women who are treated worse? Are you saying we shouldn't work on removing barriers to advancement for women as part of the solution to this problem?

I mean, other than just taking some kind of shot at me like I'm just a whiner who doesn't appreciate how good I have it, what exactly is the point you are trying to make?

It's not clear to me how having more women CEOs will help solve the horrors of prostutution, perhaps you could explain further.

Women frequently turn to prostitution, stripping et al because it's the only well paid work they can readily get.

If career success in other fields were easier to access for women, it would be easier to make other choices.

This has become a trope.

Women frequently turn to prostitution because it pays extremely well, too.

Unemployment is 3.7%. Anyone remotely employable can get a job today, but especially women.

Women made up ~47% of the workforce in 2017 and are on track to hold more jobs than men in a few years, even with a lower participation rate.

Female unemployment rate trended significantly lower than male unemployment rate during the last recession.

Women are the majority on college campuses, and earn a majority of bachelors, masters, and doctorate degrees.

Women are paid the same for the same work, when they choose to focus on their careers as much as men are expected to. And women hold special legal status to take leave to have children (there is no Federal paternity leave in the US, however some states offer it).

Career success has never been more achievable for women in particular. Inside and outside the specific field of prostitution.

>And women hold special legal status to take leave to have children (there is no Federal paternity leave in the US, however some states offer it).

Are you talking about the FMLA? It covers fathers and mothers. It's also unpaid and only lasts 12 weeks.

Wow, Wikipedia needs help on this one.

Ctrl-F 'paternity' and look at the table:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_and_Medical_Leave_Act_o...

Yep, the table listed there is wrong. The text before the table also makes it sound like it's referencing paid parental leave, which is still wrong becauase the US doesn't require paid maternal leave either.

Streetwalkers do this because they are poor and lack the skill to do something else. Some people simply don't have the skill to do things.

I don't know how to say this and not come as a jerk, but regarding the glass ceiling. By the time a women hit the glass ceiling sex work is not an option because they are old and the only sex work available would be streetwalking or low level escorting which dose not pay as much as under C-level manager or where the glass ceiling is.

I'm currently poor. I don't lack the skill to do something else. I've been offered money for sex. I've always turned it down.

Homeless men with no skills sometimes find day labor jobs. They are much less often offered money or a place to stay in exchange for sex.

I used Glass Ceiling as shorthand for removing barriers generally. Given the response here, I don't think it's worth the time and effort to try to "clarify." I don't think most people here actually want to understand the point. They are too busy shooting the idea down to wonder if there's any merit to the idea.

> Homeless men with no skills sometimes find day labor jobs. They are much less often offered money or a place to stay in exchange for sex.

This actually is not true. Some time ago I had opportune to speak with a homeless man about his situation, and his options. It turns out that he is offered money for sex quite often, perhaps daily. By his telling, he has never done it either.

The proposals are from gay men.

I was on the street with my two adult sons. They each got such an offer once from a much older man. I had a lot more such offers.

There may be the occasional statistical outlier. But, on average, you are going to see homeless women offered money for sex a great deal more often than homeless men.

If you want to rebut that, please cite sources, not anecdata. I've had a class on homelessness and public policy. I spent nearly six years homeless. I still blog about the topic. Your sample of one doesn't remotely convince me that my assertion is inaccurate.

I didn't say it never happens. I said it is much less common.

Their anecdata is "I know one guy..." My statement is that I have had a college class on the subject, I have years of personal firsthand experience as part of a mixed gender family and I still write about the topic, which means I still talk to homeless people and read up on the topic on a regular basis.

Your casual dismissal of my knowledge as mere anecdata on par with theirs isn't in the least bit "interesting".

> I don't know how to say this and not come as a jerk, but regarding the glass ceiling. By the time a women hit the glass ceiling sex work is not an option because they are old and the only sex work available would be streetwalking or low level escorting

The glass ceiling is something of a poor metaphor, because what it really refers to is a series of progressively more burdensome barriers to advancement, not a single level beyond which no women progress and below which advancement is egalitarian.

And it becomes very palpable at very low levels in many industries.

The way I see it, the problem is that people think women need skills to qualify for jobs in the first place.

As a man, many of my first jobs I got simply because the boss thought I was a promising PFY and was convinced I'd learn everything I needed within the first few days. It's a double standard.