EffectivelyHidden

joined 2 years ago
[–] EffectivelyHidden@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

This isn't legalization.

There is no government regulation of sex work being done here, this is partial decriminalization, which in the context of sex work means eliminating the crime.

So far, the research suggests that decriminalization is the best model for sex workers and for communities. New Zealand's model is better than what you see in Amsterdam. Making it legal and regulated just drives sex work “into more covert forms where working routines are negatively impacted” (Vanwesenbeeck, 2017, p. 1634). It's why when France implemented a Nordic Model, they found that “not only had it failed to reduce demand for sex work, it also failed to impact the incidence of trafficking into prostitution, and it put sex workers at greater risk by increasing the stigma against them” (Östergren, Dodillet, 2011).

But you can't fix inequality by treating everyone equally.

The people who are already at an advantage will just continue to grow that advantage, while the people at a disadvantage will fall farther and farther behind.

That's why, despite being found repeatedly to be a form of racial discrimination, affirmative action was previously found to meet the standard of Strict Scrutiny on dozens of occasions. The Supreme Court backtracked on decades of rulings today.

Certainly a better starting place than what we have now.

[–] EffectivelyHidden@kbin.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They should have written a law that explicitly does that then, and not what they did.

[–] EffectivelyHidden@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Affirmative action is an opportunity, the opportunity to go to a prestigious college.

It's not equality outcomes.

Equality of outcomes would look like UBI.

[–] EffectivelyHidden@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Correct.

But you can't fix inequality by treating everyone equally.

The people who are already at an advantage will just continue to grow that advantage, while the people at a disadvantage will fall farther and farther behind.

That's why, despite being found repeatedly to be a form of racial discrimination, affirmative action was previously found to meet the standard of Strict Scrutiny on dozens of occasions. The Supreme Court backtracked on decades of rulings today.

You only don't like context because it, like so many things, is inconvenient to your ideology. Cant' have things like facts and nuance, no sir.

view more: ‹ prev next ›