IR3ABF on Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:02:17 +0100 (CET)

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: <nettime> Sex Work and Consent at @transmediale

> economical needs continue to force people to sell their body out of
> despair and not out of consent.

This expresses imo the issue at stake: the lack of a fundamental critic regarding the economics involved in 'sex workers', for defining the 'need' to sell once bodily 'labour' out of despair is examplary for a eco-system based on unilaterally defined master-slave relationships

Politics can influence things only within reach of  'commonly' felt 'consent' about socio-cultural related 'exchanges' and by embedding this 'consent' in a hierarchical ststem. 

Playing thus a dominant master-rol and 'control and lead' in order to subjogate its power-objects i.e. sex-workers/workers/intelectuals/individuals, the same individuals who consent, nolens volens, with their submissive roles

So to formulate a fundamental critique , one should take into account the politico-economical sphere in which the 'transactions' accompagning these ' exchanges' are situated

Not only the 'consent' about the bodily labour done in exchange for the abstract formulation power disguises itself: money, the translated effect in acquiring a 'desirable' financial equilibrium 

To built all these into a well organized and extremely functional financio-economical model acceptable for many people will eventually break at that particular border where fysical pain is involved.

Justice which translates another objectification of harm done not to only one person but, more importantly, to all persons and maintains forced labour/work, whether fysically or mentallly as a necessity to survive in that politico-economical sphere, will fail ultimately

So an intimate and inter-personal exchange where the financial equilibrium is not of primary interest will be preferable and leaves out the consential


Sent from my eXtended BodY

On 8 feb. 2012, at 16:21, Jan Wildeboer <> wrote:

> On 02/08/2012 11:27 AM, Nick wrote:
>> I'm not sure how comfortable I am with switching to
>> discussing the value sex work brings to society. It does
>> seem to be a step up from talk of 'consent,' but it still
>> seems like an odd frame to me. Why do we need a framework
>> deciding whether it's a "valid form of work" in order to
>> discuss rights and conditions?
> Because in many places sex work is illegal and thus the sex workers do
> not get any form of protection. In germany, where sex work is not
> illegal, it means that sex workers can call the police for protection in
> case sth goes wrong. They can even take their customers to court in case
> they refuse to pay.

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info:
#  archive: contact: