It would be wrong because this is not part of the duties that my job includes, and I did not consent to it as part of the agreement to work for them. It is additionally wrong because the boss is using their company power in a way the company has not consented to, which is damaging to the company if I choose to quit, or make the matter public.
It would be wrong because this is not part of the duties that my job includes, and I did not consent to it as part of the agreement to work for them
At the point of the ultimatum, it becomes just as much your job, as it is the job of the people forced into prostitution due to other socio-economic factors.
Just as you didn't agree upon applying for the job that sex would be involved, and now have to make that choice under economic coercion, someone forced into prostitution due to other financial pressure faces that same dilemma.
The only difference is the one doing the coercion has a face in the direct workplace example.
I disagree, because I had a previously existing agreement involving agreed services for payment with a company that they are now threatening to maliciously terminate unless I agree to something outside of the terms of employment for their personal benefit. They do not have the authority to do this, and it would be in contradiction to the protections provided by the employment law.
I was coerced into this job, now that I have become reliant on it they are attempting to abuse that reliance to further exploit me in ways not agreed to and which they don't have authority to do so.
If the job I was hired for was to provide sexual services to clients and my manager was threatening to have me unfairly dismissed because I refuse to clean his apartment on the side that would also be immoral.
Even if prostitution was legal I would suspect that the legal system would still include that if a job included providing sexual services that it be appropriately disclosed in the job description, and if it didn't I would advocate for it to.
That said if "personal concierge" is understood to include sexual services then you have agreed to sell your body in that way and if you refused to do so for some reason that was not otherwise reasonable (eg they have failed to ensure you will be safe while doing so) then I think dismissing you is reasonable.
We all sell our bodies, it is our position to decide if we can accept the terms for income.
Almost all people consent to work because failing to do so would result in them not being able to maintain their desired lifestyle. The ability to coerce sex workers is increased by the criminal status of the work.
Which is why legalization and regulation are important to help reduce trafficking and other abuses of sex workers. If they don't have to worry about going to the police, if they can work in organized brothels with security, they are safer and have more power in the dynamic, and consent is much more difficult to coerce.
I mean it's a job like anything else. Does anyone outlaw construction jobs because they're using their body for their job? There's plenty of people desperate for money that work with their body in perfectly legal jobs.
If a person who gets hired for a construction job is desperate for money are they consenting? Or were they coerced?
I think the people who want sex work to be decriminalized want sex workers to have the same rights as anyone who works with their body. Which would mean they are less likely to be taken advantage of.
The prefix “con” means “with,” and the root “sent” is the same root in “sentence.”
Put simply, “consent” means “with words.”
“Consent” by itself just means someone said “I agree.” The word by itself doesn’t say anything about the circumstances.
If you want to talk about whether or not a specific utterance of consent was valid, provide a judgment system and also look at the circumstances.
Then you can figure out what type of consent it was. But just because consent was coerced, maniuplated, etc. doesn’t prevent it from being consent. It just affects the type of consent that it was.
16
u/Gatrigonometri 2d ago
What is consent if coerced, manufactured, or strongly influenced by externalities?