sorry for the trouble.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
--- Begin Message ---
>
> The Atlanta Journal-Constitution,
> March 14, 2008
>
> by Martha C. Nussbaum
>
> [Martha C. Nussbaum is Distinguished Service
Professor of
> Law and
> Ethics at the University of Chicago, appointed in
the
> Philosophy
> Department, Law School, and Divinity School. She is
a board
> member of
> the Human Rights Program.]
>
> [...]
>
> Why are there laws against prostitution? All of us,
with
> the
> exception of the independently wealthy and the
unemployed,
> take money
> for the use of our body. Professors, factory
workers,
> opera singers,
> sex workers, doctors, legislators – all do things
with
> parts of their
> bodies for which others offer them a fee. Some
people get
> good wages
> and some do not; some have a relatively high degree
of
> control over
> their working conditions and some have little
control; some
> have many
> employment options and some have very few. And:
some are
> socially
> stigmatized and some are not. However, the
difference
> between the sex
> worker and the professor, who takes money for the
use of a
> particularly intimate part of her body, namely her
mind, is
> not the
> difference between a "good woman" and a "bad
> woman." It is, usually,
> the difference between a prosperous well-educated
woman and
> a poor
> woman with few employment options.
>
> Many types of bodily wage labor used to be socially
> stigmatized. In
> the Middle Ages, for example, it was widely thought
base to
> take money
> for the use of one's scholarly services. Adam
Smith,
> in The Wealth of
> Nations, tells us that there are "some very
agreeable
> and beautiful
> talents" that are admirable so long as no pay is
taken
> for them, "but
> of which the exercise for the sake of gain is
considered,
> whether from
> reason or prejudice, as a sort of public
> prostitution." For this
> reason, he continues, opera singers, actors, and
dancers
> must be paid
> an "exorbitant" wage, to compensate them for the
> stigma involved in
> using their talents "as the means of
> subsistence." "Should the public
> opinion or prejudice ever alter with regard to such
> occupations," he
> concludes, "their pecuniary recompense would quickly
> diminish." Smith
> was not altogether right about the opera market, but
his
> discussion is
> revealing for what it shows us about stigma. Today
few
> professions
> are more honored than that of opera singer; and yet
only
> two hundred
> years ago, that public use of one's body for pay was
> taken to be a
> kind of prostitution.
>
> Some of the stigma attached to opera singers was a
general
> stigma
> about wage labor. Wealthy elites have always
preferred
> genteel
> amateurism. But the fact that passion was being
expressed
> publicly
> with the body – particularly the female body --
made
> singers,
> dancers, and actors non-respectable in polite
society until
> very
> recently. Now they are respectable, but women who
take
> money for
> sexual services are still thought to be doing
something
> that is not
> only non-respectable but so bad that it should
remain
> illegal.
> What should really trouble us about sex work? That
it is
> sex that
> these women do, with many customers, should not in
and of
> itself
> trouble us, from the point of view of legality, even
if we
> personally
> don't share the woman's values. Nonetheless, it
> is this one fact
> that still-Puritan America finds utterly
intolerable.
> (Note, however,
> that we no longer allow a woman's sexual history to
be
> used in a rape
> trial, because we know that the fact that a woman
may have
> had sex
> with many men does not mean that she has become a
debased
> character
> who cannot be raped.) What should trouble us are
things
> like this:
> The working conditions for most women in sex work
are
> extremely
> unhealthy. They are exploited by pimps, and they
enjoy
> little control
> over which clients they will accept. Police harass
them
> and extort
> sexual favors from them. Some of these bad features
> (unhealthiness,
> little control) sex work shares with other job
options for
> low-income
> women, such as factory work of many kinds. Other
bad
> features (police
> extortion) are the natural result of illegality
itself.
> In general we should be worried about poverty and
lack of
> education.
> We should be worried that women have too few decent
> employment options
> and too little health and safety regulation in those
that
> they do
> have. And we should be worried if men force women
to do
> things
> sexually that they do not want to do. All these
things are
> worth
> worrying about, and it is these things that sensible
> nations do worry
> about. But the idea that we ought to penalize women
with
> few choices
> by removing one of the ones they do have is
grotesque, the
> unmistakable fruit of the all-too-American thought
that
> women who
> choose to have sex with many men are tainted vile
things
> who must be
> punished.
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Green Youth Movement" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
--- End Message ---
