Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Sex for rent - addressing the wrong problem watch

Announcements
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Ellie Flynn has made a documentary investigating landlords that offer free accommodation in return for sexual favours. Her disgust is directed at the landlords simply daring to make these offers, let alone actioning these arrangements. I feel this disgust is misplaced.

    I agree it is a horrible situation to be in where you are homeless and desperate to the extent that you would agree to these conditions. But banning these would do nothing the solve the real problem - there are people who are homeless and desperate. Ban sex for rent agreements and you still have the same people being desperate, and slightly more are going to be homeless. You actually make the problem worse unless you provide an alternative.

    We all get offered stupid things all the time and hopefully we are not desperate enough to agree to them. To pick a less serious example, there are shops near me who sell water for £1 a bottle when I can get as much as I want for much cheaper piped to my home. If you're desperate enough for a drink you might well buy it, but this extortion isn't the problem, it's that people are thirsty. Banning the sale of water at extortionate prices doesn't help the thirsty people at all.

    The proposal at the end of the documentary is for the law to be more explicit in what is legal and what isn't, and for these to be enforced. There is no mention of anything that would actually help the homeless and desperate people. They are entering into exploitative arrangements because they have no other option - if you are going to call on the government to do anything, it should be to help these people rather than restrict their already crappy options even further.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    well- prostitution was, is, and always will with us.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Is there a need for a law change or merely better enforcement of existing laws?

    At a tangent, if the transaction is considered as a trade, and prostitution is generally for tax purposes, the rent foregone could likely become taxable income of the party going along with the agreement as of course is the rent not paid to the landlord..
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    You are right, the core problem is that people are desperate and homeless.

    That said, landlords should not be exploiting their position of power to extort sexual favours from their tennents, that is both morally wrong and should be illegal as it is not just forced prostitution but also black mail.

    That problem though seems to be a far wider social problem that is seemingly occurring in a number of industries independent of reach other. From Weinstein to Barry Bennel to Jimmy Saville and more, it is clear that some people think that extorting sexual gratification and/or assaulting people under them is acceptable.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DJKL)
    Is there a need for a law change or merely better enforcement of existing laws?

    At a tangent, if the transaction is considered as a trade, and prostitution is generally for tax purposes, the rent foregone could likely become taxable income of the party going along with the agreement as of course is the rent not paid to the landlord..
    I would question why the government has chosen to step in with a law in this instance. The situation isn't great to start off with, but if we were to apply the law as Ellie thinks it should be applied, that potentially makes the situation worse for the desperate homeless people and certainly makes no provision to help them.

    Since the law isn't helping anyone in this case, even if 'correctly' applied, I would question why somebody has wasted government time and effort to create it rather than spending it on actually providing actual help for the people it's trying to protect.

    (Original post by mojojojo101)
    You are right, the core problem is that people are desperate and homeless.

    That said, landlords should not be exploiting their position of power to extort sexual favours from their tennents, that is both morally wrong and should be illegal as it is not just forced prostitution but also black mail.

    That problem though seems to be a far wider social problem that is seemingly occurring in a number of industries independent of reach other. From Weinstein to Barry Bennel to Jimmy Saville and more, it is clear that some people think that extorting sexual gratification and/or assaulting people under them is acceptable.
    I think it is prostitution and exploitation, but not forced (Ellie was able to walk away from these landlords) nor blackmail (though it could easily become blackmail). The distinction I would make here is whether the bad situation has been created by the perpetrator or 'merely' exploited by them. Saville and Bennel created situations where they could cause harm, Weinstein 'merely' exploited a bad situation but also created a situation to prevent that harm from being stopped, but the landlords I do think are only 'merely' exploiting a bad situation (that's still bad, but you're missing the real problem if you focus on them). Basically, if you could delete Saville, Bennel and Weinstein from existence, then the world would have been better off. The same cannot be said for the landlords (and no, I'm not a fan of anyone who profits from being "I'm rich and I got here first" at the expense of producers and providers), their victims would still be homeless and desperate with them gone.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Exploitation.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Her disgust is not misplaced.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Any man that would do this is vile.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RivalPlayer)
    Her disgust is not misplaced.
    The implication being that she is completely happy with people being homeless and desperate because she hasn't suggested addressing that at all, but has only talked about a consequence which wouldn't even exist should the true problem be solved.

    Make more affordable homes that normal people can buy. That will solve far more problems than banning (or enforcing the ban on) sex for rent which actually solves nothing.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThomH97)


    The proposal at the end of the documentary is for the law to be more explicit in what is legal and what isn't, and for these to be enforced. There is no mention of anything that would actually help the homeless and desperate people. They are entering into exploitative arrangements because they have no other option - if you are going to call on the government to do anything, it should be to help these people rather than restrict their already crappy options even further.
    I don't really give a **** about the scummy landlords. They know these poeple are vulnerable and are exploiting that.

    This is just capitalism and renting in a screwed up economy. Often what is bad about sex work (which is basically what this is) and that which poeple object to is the unbalanced power relations between the seller and the buyer. A worker can be compelled to sell thier labour as the opposite is homelesness, this is no different, these women can only get somehwere to live by selling sex. This is often made worse by the ilegality of sex work which makes it hard for sex workers to organise or get legal protections. If you want to live in a society where women do not feel compelled to sell sex then you need to equalise the power relations. Make sure no woman has to choose between going homeless or selling sex to landlord. This requires a socialist repsonse. I don't want to outlaw sex work, but it should be done in an enviroment where no women feel compelled into it.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThomH97)
    The implication being that she is completely happy with people being homeless and desperate because she hasn't suggested addressing that at all, but has only talked about a consequence which wouldn't even exist should the true problem be solved.

    Make more affordable homes that normal people can buy. That will solve far more problems than banning (or enforcing the ban on) sex for rent which actually solves nothing.
    The landlords who make these offers are exploiting a dire situation for their sexual satisfaction. That is wrong. Affordable homes aren't coming any time soon. The landlords know this and that's why they have the gall to make such sordid offers.
    A ban on "sex for rent" will help to reduce the number of desperate young women being sexually exploited simply because they need a home.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by mojojojo101)
    That said, landlords should not be exploiting their position of power to extort sexual favours from their tennents, that is both morally wrong and should be illegal as it is not just forced prostitution but also black mail.
    This.

    It's just another form of prostitution. It's not black mail as such, as the tenants could simply walk away, but it's definitely still prostitution.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RivalPlayer)
    The landlords who make these offers are exploiting a dire situation for their sexual satisfaction. That is wrong. Affordable homes aren't coming any time soon. The landlords know this and that's why they have the gall to make such sordid offers.
    A ban on "sex for rent" will help to reduce the number of desperate young women being sexually exploited simply because they need a home.
    How does that help the desperate homeless people? They'll still be desperate, and a few more will be homeless. Almost by definition, anyone who chooses to agree to sex for rent is in a subjectively (by their own opinion) better situation than being homeless. It is a choice they shouldn't have to make, and that's the main thing - also true is that you'll have actually made the situation worse for some by removing an option that they would prefer to their current situation.

    In other words, what is your goal here? Help the homeless and desperate or remove a crappy option that some might prefer to their other crappy options?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThomH97)
    How does that help the desperate homeless people? They'll still be desperate, and a few more will be homeless. Almost by definition, anyone who chooses to agree to sex for rent is in a subjectively (by their own opinion) better situation than being homeless. It is a choice they shouldn't have to make, and that's the main thing - also true is that you'll have actually made the situation worse for some by removing an option that they would prefer to their current situation.

    In other words, what is your goal here? Help the homeless and desperate or remove a crappy option that some might prefer to their other crappy options?
    So it is better to have a roof over your head while you're being sexually exploited by a dirty old man instead of having no home at all? That is what you're saying. I don't think this should be encouraged, especially in a country where the problem of sexual abuse only seems to be growing.
    Where are the parents of these women? Why aren't they taking them in? There needs to be a cultural shift: the family unit needs to become important again.
    It'sthe only way to combat the immediate problems of the housing crisis.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RivalPlayer)
    So it is better to have a roof over your head while you're being sexually exploited by a dirty old man instead of having no home at all? That is what you're saying. I don't this should be encouraged, especially in a country where the problem of sexual abuse only seems to be growing.
    Where are the parents of these women? Why aren't they taking them in? There needs to be a cultural shift; the family unit needs to become important again. It's the only way to combat the immediate problems of the housing crisis.
    No it is not what I am saying. Some people will believe so (and they take the deal, remaining desperate and on the verge of homelessness), and others don't believe so (and remain desperate and homeless). I am saying that for the people who choose to agree to sex instead of paying rent, they are choosing what is the better option for them (out of their options they're not going to choose the worse one, are they?).

    You raise valid points regarding family that hopefully are available to the homeless and desperate. But do you think the option of sex for rent is really dissuading people from turning to their parents, and if so, wouldn't that only occur if the desperate and homeless person did think that sex for rent was better than returning to their parents?

    To give another example of what I am saying, imagine that person A was going to be shot by person B. Person C steps in and offers to stop B if A lets C stab A. Neither the shooting nor the stabbing should be happening, but some people in the situation that A is in are going to take the option of being stabbed. Not everyone would go for it, but you're not in a worse situation for being offered the choice. The primary action the government takes should be to avoid the initial situation of A being under threat from B
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RoyalSheepy)
    This.

    It's just another form of prostitution. It's not black mail as such, as the tenants could simply walk away, but it's definitely still prostitution.
    Prostitution is legal.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Notoriety)
    Prostitution is legal.
    Unfortunately so, it most definitely shouldn't be IMO.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RoyalSheepy)
    Unfortunately so, it most definitely shouldn't be IMO.
    In the example of landlords, it is purely exploitative if suggested by the landlord. If a tenant suggested sex in exchange of payment, that is ordinary prostitution and should not be decried to the same extent. People have a right to do what they will to their bodies. If they decide to work 40 hours a week for NMW, so be it; if they decide to forego the 39 hours and do 1 hour of sex work for the same weekly pay, so be it.
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Notoriety)
    In the example of landlords, it is purely exploitative if suggested by the landlord. If a tenant suggested sex in exchange of payment, that is ordinary prostitution and should not be decried to the same extent. People have a right to do what they will to their bodies. If they decide to work 40 hours a week for NMW, so be it; if they decide to forego the 39 hours and do 1 hour of sex work for the same weekly pay, so be it.
    Exploitive yes, black mail no. It's sad to see that people are actually selling their bodies as a method of payment though.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RoyalSheepy)
    Exploitive yes, black mail no. It's sad to see that people are actually selling their bodies as a method of payment though.
    There are just as exploitative jobs which involve long hours, low pay and little promise of advancement. Which involve selling your body, your mind and your time, but do not involve sex.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.