There are different forms of feminism with five of them expressing strong views on prostitution. These are liberal feminism, Marxist feminism, socialist feminism, existentialist feminism, and radical feminism. Feminism is changing and vibrant, specifically in the cases of liberal feminism and radical feminism. Feminism embraces most tenets of a specific feminist theory rejecting selected precepts outright. In any case, one thing remains certain, and feminism focuses about promoting a world where women enjoy equal shares of power and rights. Radical feminism is against prostitution on grounds that it is degrading to women, and it extends the male gender’s power politics. The different reactions that feminists have towards prostitution, specifically radical feminists are the subject of this paper, providing an analysis of morality and the relationship between prostitution and the same. I argue in this writing against prostitution, agreeing that it is morally discerning and degrading to women, and that the world should engage on rejecting the immoral action.
Feminists like liberal feminists seek to support sex workers while radical feminism deplores the work as inherently wrong. While many fail to admit to any ethical position in respect to contemporary moral terms, the radical feminists take a stand and make a moral statement. On evaluating their arguments in an ethical light, it usually breaks down logically with much of the problem stemming from the difference in understanding of ethical ideas and concepts such as morality, degradation, and virtue. On this writing, radical feminism is discussed at length as opposed to other forms of feministic theories, because of the nature of the radical feminists beliefs hold about prostitutes.
Radical feminism views prostitution not as a victimless crime, but as a circumstance where men reduce women to the image and representation as just sexual objects. This, they claim allows men to coerce and oppress women to satisfy their sexual fantasies using prostitutes. To radical feminists, economic and political appears is unfairly divided to radical feminists. According to them, this puts men in a position of dominance since they demand and get what they want. Society socializes women, on the other hand, and according to radical feminist point of view, women have to meet their desires and internalize the accepted definitions of sexual objectification and femininity.
In construction theories on prostitutes and prostitution, radical feminists will do well to consider the diverse reasons why women chose to enter the profession. It is important that they consider the corrupting impact of the deviant behavior as it presents its effect on society. Moral degradation of any kind affects society both collectively and individually. One may argue that while prostitution undoubtedly degrades women to a certain extent, it may not be necessarily as morally degrading as many of the other forms of moral degeneration.
Generally, radical feminists do not subscribe to the broader view of prostitution, one that seeks to not so much exonerate women, but give reasons why they fall into prostitution. According to them, it seems almost imperative for the individuals indulging into prostitution to find a connection between pimps who are the oppressors to the women and a generalized theory on male dominance viewing and portraying men as being oppressors and perpetuating their power. By reducing sexual dynamics making sexual oppression the central focus in male-female relationships, radical feminists attempt to create an end run around classical and conventional ethical views of what is right and wrong. Construction a theory for restricting prostitutes’ rights in terms of oppression as opposed to morality, simply, is another method creatively conceived by rejecting the idea of having prostitution serving as a valid way to live life. For women who solely depend upon prostitution, preventing them from engaging in prostitution may change their lives for the worse (Anderson 757).
Abuse and violence bring to attention the concept of immorality. Political dialogue, which radical feminists construct in regards to oppression, is but a second-order effort to provide a solution to the first order problem that can be better resolved in the conventional moral terms. Classical and contemporary ethics have built stable foundations from which they build and integrate into other matters of credible reasoning. A theory thought to be superior is a theory, which integrates properly into a wide spectrum of human experience, theoretical views and human experience. A narrowly subjective theory has a limited scope in its application. Thus assessing prostitution in terms of its moral nature falls into this category.
There is a link between radical feminism and morality because their assertion and this I agree is that prostitution is wrong. In the field of ethics, a formal discipline that analyzes wrong and right should be the discipline that discusses the matter. Both the conventional morality and radical feminism view, agree to deem inappropriate behavior. The moral nature that prostitution takes does not however derive from the idea that it is degrading to women. The closest analog in ethics, which links prostitution with degradation of women, and those feminists identify with, is the view that some behaviors are degenerative and others are generative, and therefore it is necessary to avoid and discourage the earlier. Ericsson (337) claims that prostitution is not a social evil, and rather the cause of disagreement is the “punitive and hostile” attitudes society has adopted towards prostitution and other promiscuous relationships. An argument for prostitution does not change the overwhelming evidence that radicals such as myself believe in.
Shifting the earlier center in sexual morality from classical ethical theory and contemporary ethical theory towards a new morality where moral right and moral wrong becomes the ultimate function of male domination and one that would not hold logically. If indeed, one were to choose male domination as the major underpinning of morality, then all the systems of the moral theory must be explicable in exact and consistent terms with the new moral centering that located male thirst for power and domination as a central factor. If governments chose to regulate prostitution, there is a strong chance the degenerative behaviors will evolve. Prostitutes will then begin to claim their freedom and rights to practice their trade. Making it, a professional occupation may help keep the prostitutes on a generative path of personal evolution. This may go on to the extent that they will be willing to regulate their career just like other professionals do, and with this, society may be inclined to accept sex workers to a greater extent.
Perpetuating the idea that women are victims and that perhaps the judgment passed on women indulging in prostitution might be as true as people will ever look at it, Ericsson encourages the argument on morality acknowledging that its morality is not a fact that philosophers can ignore. Ericsson argues against the radical feminist view and takes up a more liberal approach. He counters the argument that it has to do with a sentimentalist charge power. The reason he argues for the hostility against prostitution is merely that it involves trade of something very basic and elementary to human life, something that feminists believe human beings should not sell (Ericsson 341). However, the basic item they sell is one most important feature of humanity. The essence of his statement finds me ready with the defense that indeed, because it is so basic and elementary to life, is why prostitutes should not be caring on in the trade.
While liberalists argue in defense of radical feminists’ theologies, Anderson (2002) presents the argument that complete prostitution’s complete abolition may not be the ultimate solution. This is because, and I agree, it may be the only form of employment available for them, and irrespective of the feeling society has towards it, it still provides some economic benefit to the prostitutes (Anderson 756). The argument presented here is that unless there is proof that prostitution is the greatest when it comes to maintaining male domination and female oppression among all other sexual relationships, then, it may not be plausible to bar prostitution. As Laura Shrage states in her conclusion, prostitution needs no specific cure rather, as feminists go, liberal, radical or otherwise, a solution to either regulate or leave prostitution as is will emerge.
Conclusion
Morality founds upon the obligations that society has set aside and the expectations they hold. The fact remains that the opinions that society has are the ones that decide if something is wrong or not. As such, it is critical that society takes a radical approach and seeks a way to accept the radical point of view. This is to condemn prostitution as an immoral act although and not by shunning those that participate in it. Rather, this is by the recognition that indeed there are women in society with such a lack of opportunity and means for survival that need a means to get their daily bread. This creates opportunity to rescue those women who have to indulge in prostitution and create a niche for them to indulge in other morally right careers. My belief is that women in the circumstance that society declares as immoral need empowerment. If they take up a feminist view, they are likely to find themselves in better circumstances. The philosophy of radical feminism presents is that of a strong-willed woman who should not be in a demeaning position at all, thus, prostitution is immoral and uncouth, and society is under no obligation to accept it, but to helpout.
Work cited
Anderson, Scott A. "Prostitution and Sexual Autonomy: Making Sense of the Prohibition of Prostitution*." Ethics 112.4 (2002): 748-780.
Ericsson, Lars O. "Charges against Prostitution: An Attempt at a Philosophical Assessment." Ethics (1980): n. pag. Print.
Scanlon, Thomas. "A theory of freedom of expression." Philosophy & Public Affairs (1972): 204-226.
Shrage, Laurie. "Should Feminists Oppose Prostitution." Ethics (1989): n. page. Print.
