[postmortembees]

Why, why would you say that? Parent leaves for work, parent comes home from work with income.

Is it because sex work is dangerous? So is fishing, and pizza delivery, and construction.

Is it because sex work wears down your body? Plenty of general contractors, nurses, and landscapers have jobs that are more physically demanding.

I genuinely do not see how, if someone has a reasonable separation of work/home, it would present any more negativity on a kid's upbringing than any other physical labor.

[badrabbit]

The idea that the person who gave birth to you is being used to pleasure random men for money is psychologically traumatizing because every child treasures and looks up to their parents (or wants to). Their life and identitiy is intertwined with yours and their decision or vicitimization is also by extension affecting you.

You want your parents to be valued and respected. You would think sex for money is valuing but it is or at least feels like devaluing. It is one thing for your parent to have sex because they want to and for the sake of it, it is another thing to do it because they have to which means they are unable or unwilling to provide anything else of value to pursue partners they are interested in, instead of the general public.

The idea that anyone, even neighbors and hobos could be paying to penetrate the person you treasure the most and is supposed to be role model and teach you how to live right is at the very least disturbing. Even porn stars work with other porn stars but prostitutes at best filter by appearances aside from money.

Children are protective of their parents and vice versa. Whether a child or parent, seeing them become a prostitute feels like something sacred to you is being desecrated.

If that doesn't make sense to you, I suggest taking off the ideological glasses.

[postmortembees]

>If that doesn't make sense to you, I suggest taking off the ideological glasses.

You might want to check and see who is wearing the ideological glasses. You are the one who has the hangup here.

Sex is. People enjoy sex. People can enjoy sex with close intimate partners or flings. People can enjoy sex or perform it for money. Not all sex work is penetrative either.

You've got a narrow and restrictive view of the world.

[paulddraper]

> how it would present any more negativity than any other physical labor

The mistake is characterizing sex work as "physical labor."

There is a well documented link between sex work and trauma/psychological disorders.

[capableweb]

How would you characterize sex work if not physical labor, together with a bunch of other characteristics too.

There is documented links between content moderation (and a bunch of other professions too) and trauma/psychological disorders. Hence these professions should be able to talk to psychiatrists freely, like any work that has a metal toll.

[ilyt]

Well, one day kid will want to know where you work and what you do and you can't lie forever. Especially if somehow they learn early or other kids will.

But yeah there is plenty of worse things that can happen.

[candiodari]

I hate that people have a purely punitive approach to this. They get to feel puritan with a semi-reasonable argument: sex work damages others! It damages children! And, for that they get to do anything, because now they want to "help children", and not what they're really doing, using violence against children to attempt to impose their own moral values on the world. What they're really doing ... that sounds a bit bad. But it sounds bad because it is bad. And let's ignore that organisations like the police or Child Services definitely have their share of people who merely want to use violence against children, for whatever reason, because those definitely exist.

Look at what these people DO! Are they improving child services for the children in there? No, of course not. These moral crusaders are, effectively, looking to punish children so they can look good and moral. Damaging real people, real children with real violence so society can look just a little closer to their moral ideal.

You see ... what determines if this is better or worse is the alternative. If you're really after the welfare of the child, what determines your position is the alternative ... What damages the child more? That's what matters for the moral position. Taking the child away, in India, leads to this:

https://borgenproject.org/orphans-in-india/

So no, a parent who's a sex worker is a LOT better.

That should be the basis for your moral position. It's all well and good to define an ideal and then blame people for not attaining perfection ... but of course we'd all be in jail if that's how we actually work. Is leaving children with sex workers ideal? No, but WE DON'T CARE ABOUT IDEAL. We care about the best possible situation for the child! And that, sorry, is definitely, without any doubt, letting sex workers raise children.

You want to change sex work? Offer these people some better options. And if you can't do that, for whatever reason, throwing the child into child services IS NOT a good second option.

And I would argue this applies to pretty much every country in the world, including the US. The situation of orphans may not be quite as bad as in India, it's certainly not better than living with (very) suboptimal parents, whether that means this or ...

And, frankly, that should be the only concern.

[postmortembees]

Someday I had to tell my kid that people have two mommies and some people have two daddies, and you know what? It was fine. You can abstract it for a kid until they are old enough to understand.

[blamarvt]

What’s wrong with the truth?

[flangola7]

A frightening large amount of people have terrible and judgemental attitudes towards sex work of any kind even though there they are objectively irrational. Rather than introspect, they try to debate and argue they are somehow correct. This is one of my favorite most unapologetic videos on the entire internet: https://files.catbox.moe/fzmvu0.mp4

[majikaja]

Sex work is correlated with poverty and mental problems. Of course people are going to think such an individual is likely to be an unfit parent.

[akomtu]

Well, sex work corrupts the workers psychologically and aids the addiction of customers. Sex work is a lot closer to selling mild drugs than to mowing lawns. It's hardly the worst thing in our society, for there are far worse white collar jobs that are officially respected, but it's not a reason to whitewash it. Another way to think about it is to imagine it's a virtual reality that customers pay for to get a dopamine rush. The VR allows to create any experience for the customers, but is it a good thing to do?

[_a_a_a_]

It seems like a judgemental attitude induced by religion. Those most against prostitution seem to be in religious groups.

[dijit]

I would go further and say that some people who are against sex work are against the propensity for other crime to occur (including trafficking, drug use etc) or for violence to be perpetrated against sex workers.

Ironically, if we didn't have puritan attitudes, the majority of those issues would be mitigated quite drastically.

[chimeracoder]

> It seems like a judgemental attitude induced by religion. Those most against prostitution seem to be in religious groups.

That's a common misconception, but it's simply not true. If you talk to actual sex workers, they'll consistently tell you that they face judgemental attitudes and discrimination across the board, not just from religious people.