Obviously if you're assessing your self worth by your attractiveness to the horned-up female gaze, that's just as bad. The obvious unhealthiness of basing your self-worth on how many people want to bang you transcends gender and sexual preference.If this is the radfem thread, then you're being a heteronormative meanie for not acknowledging that lesbians and bi women also enjoy boobs. Lesbian erasure, and all.
I disagree with a lot of this. Demand for prostitution isn't driven by supply. A large part of it is driven by the darker parts of toxic masculinity ; by the fragility of male egos, by society's expectation of men to assert dominance and power over women, by insecure men measuring our self-worth by our virility and sexual potency. These are male liberation issues that feminists aren't in a good position to help solve, which makes it even more tragic that the men's lib movement has been largely overshadowed by the men's rights movement, who have no interest in self-improvement or introspection. Possibly an even larger part of the demand (and even some of the supply) is driven by simple human frailty ; by loneliness and insecurity and isolation and thanatos. I'm not sure these are issues that can be solved, by anyone, ever.Sex work harms women, that’s my view. Even the high end stuff, like starlets ‘on a yacht in Dubai’ (for which read: high end escorting) drives demand. Even the very few happy hookers willingly doing it drive demand because there are not enough of them. Those individual women may benefit financially but the demand they drive extends down to the end of the industry where it’s not really a choice because you’re hooked on drugs, in debt to a pimp, of outright trafficked. All of it is bad for women.
Will we ever get rid of it? No. Be realistic. It’ll always happen. Should we legalise? No, because IMO that sends a message that society is Ok with it. Societal opprobrium and shame is a powerful force. It does act as a brake.
To me the question is how we manage it to reduce harm as much as possible. The Nordic model seems to be Ok. Of course what would really work is for no woman ever to be in a position where she needs to sell sex so that anyone who is doing is doing it as freely as you ever can be free in our world. But that would require eradicating poverty in the west, and eradication of poverty, war and slavery in the grimmer bits of the world.
When it comes to supply, we're largely talking about marginalised women. Bored insta-thots aside, it's mostly teenage runaways, drug addicts, cluster-b personality disorders, desperate poverty, mental illnesses, trafficked immigrants, modern-day slaves. Choosing between legalisation or illegalisation is a simple choice of the lesser evil, to me. Legalising it absolutely hurts women as a class and normalises their objectification ; but it improves our ability to rescue, or at least improve conditions for the hundreds of thousands of prostituted and trafficked women and children who've fallen through the cracks. I will always choose the welfare of hundreds of thousands of marginalised women living in hellscape conditions over the dozens of trust-fund babies who'll get emotionally drained because soft whoring wasn't the adventure they thought it'd be, or the hundreds of reddit cat-ladies offended that it's a legal option.
As far as the Nordic Model goes, it's the best imperfect compromise when viewed through a feminist lens. It protects the welfare of sex workers as well as the dignity of women as a class. It's only when you pull back from that feminist lens that serious problems with it crop up for me. I won't go too much into it because I have little faith in the German or NZ models, so it's just bitching about something when I don't have any better ideas.