To the Editor:Re “It’s Not ‘Sex Work.’ It’s Prostitution,” by Pamela Paul (column, Aug. 18), about how the term “sex work” legitimizes the exploitative sex trade:Ms. Paul’s article is courageous, as evenhanded and thoughtful as it is provocative.
As a former Title VI-funded doctoral fellow whose thesis explored the effects of the professionalization of traditional female occupations, I was steeped in radical feminist theory, and I know the theoretical basis for the notion that sex “work” involves choice and agency.
Ron DeSantis’s remark that slaves gained useful skills while being treated like chattel property.
Joel M. YoungPlacitas, N.M.To the Editor:Pamela Paul’s opposition to the term “sex work” is akin to opposing the term “domestic workers” for maids because exploitation and trafficking are common in domestic service.
Rather than denying workers their rightful status in industries rife with abuse, we should fight for enhanced labor protections.
Persons:
’, Pamela Paul, ”, Ron DeSantis’s, Joel M, Young Placitas, Pamela Paul’s