“Early in the morning he came again to the temple. All the people came to him, and he sat down and taught them. The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman who had been caught in adultery, and placing her in the midst they said to him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in the act of adultery. Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. So what do you say?” This they said to test him that they might have some charge to bring against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger on the ground. And as they continued to ask him, he stood up and said to them, “Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.” John 8 (2-7)
There are many kinds of work that tend to dehumanize people and tend to force people to subjugate their human dignity and choices of life and work. In such cases, choices and potential of the Life get subjugated to the compulsions of livelihood. Instead of challenging and changing the social, economic and political conditions that give rise to such dehumanising modes of work, the tendency is to stigmatize those who get in to such areas and modes of work. In spite of thousands of years of existence, those who are involved in providing paid sexual services to clients are often stigmatised as ‘prostitutes’ while ignoring the social and cultural conditions of patriarchy, subjugation, suppressed sexuality, social and economic inequality and double standards of morality. The tendency is to point fingers at women who are forced to ‘sell’ sex. Here, what comes to mind is the sentence of Jesus: ‘“Let him who is without sin among you be the first to throw a stone at her.”
Let us take the issue of manual scavenging; that is a good example. I fully respect all those who are forced into this abhorrent "profession"; however, that does not mean that I would choose to glorify the "profession" of carrying shit. As a concerned and responsible person I would consider it my duty to ensure the creation of adequate infrastructure to eliminate this "profession" of manual scavenging, a "profession" which is a good example of what Marx describes as "alienated work". "
1) It is important to challenge "alienated work" which dehumanizes, subjugates and exploits people. Dignity and ability of making strategic choices need to be one of the defining forces of any creative and humane work ethic. Manual Scavenging is imposed up on someone because of the very birth and descend. In most of the cases, it is the ugliest face of the cast system (the Film “Lesser Human" by Stalin. K very well captures this). This is abhorrent because people cannot simply escape from this form of alienated work - as it a part of the cast-exploitation. Precisely because of this, I am totally against "Devdasi system"(a very well entrenched mode of patriarchy, sexual exploitation, and many other things); I am totally against trafficking of children and young women or pushing someone in to "prostitution" by poverty, patriarchy and exploitative social condition.
Having said this, the fact of the matter is people do shit-and there is provision for handling this- through a range of technology, sanitation services and many millions of people work in the sector. So the problem is not the work in itself- it is the exploitative condition, dehumanizing condition and alienation. This condition is what needs to be changed.
2) Most of the healthy human beings will have to eat, shit, and also enjoy sex (irrespective of gender). There are a whole range of services/and provisions to handle all their basic/instinctual need of human beings. From the very beginning of human history, different kinds of institutional and market arrangements emerged to deal with eating, shitting and sex. There are also some sort of conventions, culture, and taste in all these three areas depending on the immediate environment, culture, and institutions. Morality, Market, Institutions like family etc also emerged to address some of these basic needs as well as the large social and creative needs of human being. There has been always an arrangement to deal with sexual urges of people- in various forms in various society and cultures all through history; otherwise there would not have been a wide range of erotica in almost ancient civilization- including the Phallic symbol-fertility cult; sex and sexuality- has been a predominant force of desire, creativity, war, domination, exploitation and nirvaana. Kama Surthra or Kahjuraho would not have emerged out of any social or cultural vacuum. It is the patriarchal culture, use of religion as means to create moralism to subjugate and rule, and the institutional framework that on the one hand subversively encouraged alienated forms of "prostitution" and on the other hand stigmatised those women- making them the prisoners and victims of an unjust and exploitative system. This is what needs to be challenged.
3) Those who provide pleasure services or helping another to meet a basic human need ( there are so many examples of this beyond sex-related services) or entertaining- are a part of what we now call "service sector". Here too the question is whether in the service sector( ranging from circus, to belly dancers to "Mohini" attama, fashion show, theatre), there is any form of work that alienate a person because of subjugation, exploitations and dehumanization. The criminalization of those involved work/roles related to providing services( by men, women and transgender)of sex, will actually perpetuate subjugation, dehumanization and alienation of those who are at the receiving end of this 'profession'- poor women, trafficked children who were pushed in the market( without any basic Rights and with huge social stigma) by an unjust system. But when they are mobilized, when they fight against alienating, exploitative conditions, and when they ask for dignity, fair payment, health or social security- they are asking for justice,dignity and the basic human rights to live, love, and make choices about their own body and line of work.
4) The fact of the matter is that there are millions and millions of people( mostly women) working in this line of service;they are a sort of service providers to the entire society. In a society with suppressed sexuality there could be more sex-related violence as well..By criminalization and stigmatization, the patriarchal society exploit these millions of people, and use "morality" as a means for subjugating people as well as her/his right over his/her body.
The stigmatization, patriarchy and conservative moralism of the powerful need to be challenged at ethical, political and philosophical levels. I thought Marx did precisely that. So it is very much in line with Marxist positioning to help the stigmatized, exploited and alienated "masses" through unionization so that these "masses" can be transformed in to people who not only produce for utility but also for beauty- as creative human being with a sense of agency - to make decisions, to make choices and to live a life of joy and peace. So I argue for the dignity and rights of Sex workers from a Marxist perspective as well.
For instance, most of the Sex workers in Thailand are dignified 'professionals' who will claim their dignity, choose their work and sometime even clients- and provide services without compromising their health and choices. Dr. Metchai played a very important role in transforming the mindset. However, it is important to also recognize the role of exploitative economic networks, often with the blessings of the powerful vested interest, that perpetuate such dehumanizing modes of work. War and aggression created red streets in many countries. For example, the growth of Phatphong in Bangkok had a direct link with Vietnam War- and the covert and overt efforts to create a 'market' for the rest and 'recreation' of the American soldiers. So it is important to challenge an exploitative social,economic and moral system that perpetuate such exploitative practises.
5) Without dignity and a sense of beauty- the very act of sex too can be alienating- wherever it is done- in the "respected" four walls of "family" or elsewhere. In most of the safe-institutional set up of 'families'- "sex" can be as alienating (if not more )as in the case of so-called sex 'work'. How many women do have right over her body and sexual choices in family or society? How many of them are even asked whether they enjoyed or had an orgasm? In many cases, it is simple "rape"- one of the most criminal acts of violation of human dignity.Sexual or sex -related 'domestic' violences also indicate the very patriarchal conditions that often deny women the right over her body or right to have pleasure.
The key issue here is not only the social, economic and political conditions that perpetuate alienating or dehumanizing forms of work, it is also about patriarchal attitude towards sex and sexuality. So this needs to be addressed in terms of challenging the very political economy of the conditions and positions that perpetuate any dehumanizing or alienating forms of work, it is also about challenging ourselves about our received notions of the morality and politics of sex and sexuality. It is rather easy to sit on a 'pedestal' to either patronise 'sex-workers' or to moralise about 'sins' of sex, sexuality and 'sex' and stigmatise the people involved in such area of compulsions. Here an important task is to humanize and to politicise those involved in such alienating area of 'work' so that they are empowered enough to make choices of their life and work and bargain and negotiate with their life and work for themselves, like any other human being involved in any area of work.
