i would argue the way sex workers get customers is at the core of your complaints about sexwork. you'll still need pimps if the johns need to vet/be vetted to avoid getting arrested, it's part of the reason they exist now. the other component, safety, is not affected so much by the legal immunity you propose, because everyone involved except the sexworker are committing illegal acts, and so the trade is still secret & incentives to not report/act on abuse remain for those parties---even for the SWs who might still risk their livelihood.

if neither party is committing a crime, the reasons for a broker diminish, or their role more resembles an agent. if a crime is committed any party can call for help, not just the sexworker. for the record i'm advocating decriminalization, not legalization into designated brothels in designated districts

[–] ZoomeristLeninist@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

good points. johns and pimps are still reprehensible, but i can see how decriminalization on both sides can be safer/better for sex workers

[–] Dolores@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

drug dealers, even the legal ones are shittheads too, but when the trade is public they've less ability to poison people, which is the best we can do short of revolution. thats the other decriminalization case i think is helpful to think about and compare.

[–] ZoomeristLeninist@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

thank you for being patient in helping me understand this better

[–] Dolores@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

thanks for listening!