This is only a Preview!

You must Publish this diary to make this visible to the public,
or click 'Edit Diary' to make further changes first.

Posting a Diary Entry

Daily Kos welcomes blog articles from readers, known as diaries. The Intro section to a diary should be about three paragraphs long, and is required. The body section is optional, as is the poll, which can have 1 to 15 choices. Descriptive tags are also required to help others find your diary by subject; please don't use "cute" tags.

When you're ready, scroll down below the tags and click Save & Preview. You can edit your diary after it's published by clicking Edit Diary. Polls cannot be edited once they are published.

If this is your first time creating a Diary since the Ajax upgrade, before you enter any text below, please press Ctrl-F5 and then hold down the Shift Key and press your browser's Reload button to refresh its cache with the new script files.


  1. One diary daily maximum.
  2. Substantive diaries only. If you don't have at least three solid, original paragraphs, you should probably post a comment in an Open Thread.
  3. No repetitive diaries. Take a moment to ensure your topic hasn't been blogged (you can search for Stories and Diaries that already cover this topic), though fresh original analysis is always welcome.
  4. Use the "Body" textbox if your diary entry is longer than three paragraphs.
  5. Any images in your posts must be hosted by an approved image hosting service (one of: imageshack.us, photobucket.com, flickr.com, smugmug.com, allyoucanupload.com, picturetrail.com, mac.com, webshots.com, editgrid.com).
  6. Copying and pasting entire copyrighted works is prohibited. If you do quote something, keep it brief, always provide a link to the original source, and use the <blockquote> tags to clearly identify the quoted material. Violating this rule is grounds for immediate banning.
  7. Be civil. Do not "call out" other users by name in diary titles. Do not use profanity in diary titles. Don't write diaries whose main purpose is to deliberately inflame.
For the complete list of DailyKos diary guidelines, please click here.

Please begin with an informative title:

I need some help from this community getting thoughts and forming an opinion about this. The question is whether it is inherently immoral to visit a sex worker  for sex (e.g., prostitute).
Yes, I know that it is illegal except in a few places in Nevada.
Yes, I know that it is risky and probably a bad idea.
And yes, I know that most prostitutes are in fact coerced and trafficked into their situation.
My question is- assuming that the sex worker is there of her own free will, is not coerced or trafficked, is there anything inherently wrong about it?


You must enter an Intro for your Diary Entry between 300 and 1150 characters long (that's approximately 50-175 words without any html or formatting markup).

Once all of these other factors are taken into consideration, I have generally in the past believed that it was not inherently immoral.

For example, let's say, you have a middle class young woman from NYC who's going to college or has another career and is making money on the side. She gets to pick and choose which clients she goes to, set her own rules, and is treated well by her clients. You will find plenty of sex workers in this situation who will testify that they found their work worthwhile and satisfying, and not traumatic or exploitative, although they are a minority.

And on the other hand, you have clients, who might have legitimate reasons for going to a sex worker. You might have a person who is disabled or handicapped, or suffers from severe social anxiety disorder, or some other fault such that they cannot acquire non-transactional sex. I have even heard of one who claimed to be diagnosed with cancer, probably six months to live, and wanted to have sex once in his life, but he was very concerned about the feminist implications of his actions and did not want to hurt anybody. So it is possible to have seemingly respectful clients.

However, I have recently heard an argument (from some in feminist circles), which goes like this: That sex is inherently about mutual sexual attraction and pleasure. It is such an intimate thing, such a personal thing, that it should never be used as a commodity, or object to be traded in a capitalistic marketplace. Therefore, male clients who buy sex feel entitled to sex because they think they deserve to get sex for money without being able to offer sexual gratification to the woman. That key word, 'entitled' keeps coming up over and over. In effect what this argument to me feels like is that the money is qualitatively inferior to the intimacy in question, no matter how much.

The agency of the sex worker or prostitute in question, however, is effectively discarded, and she becomes a 'victim', regardless of how she chooses to frame her own experiences.

So, what do you all think? I am interested in hearing from a feminist perspective. My previous position was that there is nothing inherently wrong about visiting a sex worker for sex, but this new argument also rings true. Although it only seems to go so far.

More broadly, what do you think of the dilemma of disabled or extremely unattractive people who face major barriers to accessing non-transactional sex? If you are against prostitution, what are these people supposed to do? Or is it not a big deal?

Extended (Optional)

Originally posted to papermoon on Thu Nov 28, 2013 at 06:47 PM PST.

Also republished by Feminism, Pro-Feminism, Womanism: Feminist Issues, Ideas, & Activism.

Your Email has been sent.