Would UBI End Sex Work?
Would a strong universal basic income decimate the willingness to engage in sex work?
The question is really about what incentivizes sex work in the first place. At one extreme, it is caused by the prodding of a sexually-permissive liberal culture that glamorizes and empowers sexuality; at the other extreme, it is simply a convenient if unpleasant economic decision, like any other stressful job in a capitalist system that commodifies every aspect of life.
Ho Ho Ho!
Many live for the joy of giving.
And somewhere in the middle are the people who just like to give blowjobs to homeless bums and drunk factory workers.
Originally Posted by xerxe
I mean, it doesn’t always have to be about the money.
Yes, that's what I'm asking about.
Originally Posted by Adam Strange
People despite making more money usually tend to live beyond their means, they just have a more expensive lifestyle. One can make 200K in a year and still be in debt, many are. This only works for ppl who are capable of living within their means, in this case UBI. Otherwise IF someone goes into debt despite ubi and has no other skills to offer due to whatever reason, they will resort to sex work. Arguably IF hot, onlyfans is probably better option than actual sex work, but the latter may become appealing IF the person in question has certain personality traits or problems depending on the perspective which push them towards sexual activity risky or not.
Originally Posted by xerxe
Outside of this demand for sex work is always high regardless. Where there is demand a supply will be found.
Idk I think sometimes there's this stereotype/misconception that anybody who got in sex work was there cuz they are a worthless slut who couldn't do anything else and is immoral/fucked up - once in awhile you do get that, but to be fair - you also get that with any job no matter it is.
I read an interesting blog about sex work the other day how important it is to have your own values and self-respect. Like it's okay to turn down a client if they smell too bad or they ask you to do something too gross and Dahmer-y, you have to teach people that you are a person deserving of respect not just an object they can objectify- and that you have your own limits/standards even if you are in a job where you can lick another man's armpits and stuff. It can still be moral and even kind, but you have to enforce that thing yourself. ((as stereotypically & objectively speaking some really prude-ish/ultra conservative sex-is-only-for-heterosexually-making-babies-and-you-should-never-ever EVER like it or find it fun, it's always sinful and horrible. etc, people will always look down on sex work.))
Having standards like that makes a sex worker get paid more- not less. There is a reason why professional porn stars buttholes are ultra clean , right? Think about it.
"You teach other people how they are allowed to treat you" Oprah-y but there's a lot of truth to it.
Last edited by Hot Scalding Gayser; 10-30-2020 at 06:41 AM.
I don't think it would. UBI would just be basic income. Plenty of people would want or need more.
Many, probably most prostitutes — real ones, not OnlyFans thots — are forced or heavily pressured into the role. If they had economic security I’d expect prostitution to drop. Whether UBI would provide security is another question.
Originally Posted by Aramas
I have not thought this through, and it could be a completely impractical suggestion, but what's wrong with offering farmlands in addition to UBI?
If UBI frees people to quit awful jobs, and if the UBI safety-net diminishes the risks of starting businesses (allowing common people to "seize the means of production" as it were) then I'd be unquestionably in favour of it. Ongoing UBI experiments will hopefully return encouraging results. If not, UBI could create a two-tier society, with an entire class of shiftless consumers that are dependent on billionaire largess—largess that comes with strings attached.
Ownership of land, OTOH, presents the opportunity for self-dependence. Barring certain legal obligations like eminent domain, it is inalienable. I don't foresee UBI being sidelined in this scenario: farms can still go out of business if there's no demand for their product; an incompetent person can still bankrupt a farm, although this would no doubt be lessened by business education, automation, and (controversially) some protectionism. Ideally, farming communities would be somewhat self-sufficient.
I suggested this idea to an anti-immigrant Trump supporter who believes that immigrants sponge off welfare. He was more amenable to immigration under the condition that immigrants become self-sufficient. It's also worth noting that many conservatives are drawn, at least in their rhetoric and self-presentation, to psychological themes that involve masculinity and ruggedness. A "return to the land/wild" movement certainly punches in that direction.
Last edited by xerx; 11-01-2020 at 08:52 PM.
Reason: capitalization change