Earning money without enjoying it is what coalminers and rubbish-collectors do. People who enjoy their jobs are the lucky ones.

Having an intellectually stimulating job and enjoying it is a real luxury.

One aspect I find frightening about interpreting prositution as a "real job" is that women could be denied unemployment benifits if they reject a job that would involve them selling their body and their consent.

> The same argument could be made about IT. Prostitutes sell their private parts, programmers sell their brains.

I don't think this works, because a brain is a "tool" used to "produce" a service, while a prositute is actually just providing their body to be used. They are competing with puppets and animals (e.g. https://www.vice.com/en/article/dpdnp7/yo1-v14n10), and are as such reduced to objects potentially beyond human dignety.

This is a great argument for Universal Basic Income, or some other system that allows people to choose not to work.

It's naive to think that there aren't people being pressured into "selling their body and their consent" to work that is generally considered moral.

> I don't think this works, because a brain is a "tool" used to "produce" a service, while a prositute is actually just providing their body to be used.

GP's argument was poorly stated. It's more genuine to compare sex work to hard labor. There is the risk of physical harm (STDs/injuries), a low barrier to entry (attractive and have a camera/in decent shape and can get to/from work), is considered by many as demoralizing (gross prostitute/dumb factory worker) but also glorified by many (high-class escort/blue collar backbone of our country).

In what ways is it truly different for someone to be denied unemployment benefits for rejecting a hard labor job than it is for someone to be denied unemployment benefits for refusing to be a sex worker (prostitute)?

> One aspect I find frightening about interpreting prositution as a "real job" is that women could be denied unemployment benifits if they reject a job that would involve them selling their body and their consent.

Imagine vegan denying butcher work. It's not wildly different, I guess? I think that laws should allow some flexibility in choosing work, when it comes to unemployment benefits. And questionable jobs should not even be offered.

>while a prositute is actually just providing their body to be used.

I imaging it depends on the person and area, much like every other "social job", no?

I argue the lack of legal protections are what allows them to be reduced to objects. For the tech equivalent, look at the game industry and some of the more extreme examples of crunch. Not just some month long sprint before release, but months, sometimes years of 12 hour work days to some billion dollar coporation not paying overtime, that may not even give you paychecks on time.

and those are "legal jobs". I can't imagine how much lower it goes when the governemt not only turns a blind eye, but punishes you on top of it all.

As an enginer you are sometimes reduced below human dignity.

>The same argument could be made about IT

The military is probably a better analogy. Well paid with few skills required to enter. High risk of permanent injury. Generally not reviled with paternalistic and degrading thoughts about those who choose to do it.