Theorizing sex work

Student’s Name:
Course:
Instructor:
Date:
Major differences theorizing sex
There have been hard debates in the international arenas, which theorize sex work. The dominant among the feminist positions on the ongoing debates are the feminist radicals and the sex radicals. The feminist radicals oppose sex trade terming dehumanizing to human gender. They posit that sex trade, whether through voluntary or forceful methods is a violation of human rights. The radical feminist proposes that sex is a tool that makes any woman subordinate to a man. However, the sex radicals oppose censorship of sex, suggesting that women also need to satisfy their erotic interest. The sex radicals further suggest improvement of sex workers condition as a method of promoting respect for women in the sex trade. The two groups oppose each other from various perspectives.
Theoretical backdrop difference
Radical feminists point that sexuality propagates gender imbalance. Radical feminist insist that sexuality is men ideology to force women into satisfying the desires of men. This approach suggests that women are tools for satisfying demands of men while ignoring the needs of a woman. Radical feminist cite the position of women on marriage. They point that by laws unfairly forces women to submit to men. Radical feminists suggest that a good wife voluntarily submits to the husband while a wicked woman is compelled to submission (Sutherland, 3). This approach suggests that women have no voice when it comes to sexuality; sex according to the radicals is a means by which women are forced to take a lesser position than men (Sutherland, 3).

Sex radicals on the other hand term the radical feminist idea misguided. Sex radicals move beyond consent definition based on men but also posit that the notion of sex accommodates even gay and lesbians (Sutherland, 5). Therefore, arguing based on gender imprudent since people of the same gender consent to sex. At this point, the sex radicals question the basis of gender imbalance where people of the same gender consent to sex. The sex radicals nullify submission theory suggesting that parties involved consent to sex from similar bargaining viewpoint (Sutherland, 5-7).
Different perception of “Work, Sex, and Sex-work theory” (Sutherland, 11- 14)
Radical feminists do not accept sex as a commercial activity to women; they state that women are robbed of their sexuality in the name of work. They posit that the business activity is forceful in nature since it allows exploitation of labour and alienation of the so-called sex worker (Sutherland, 11-12). According to the Radical feminists, ‘prostitution’ does not qualify as a mean of employment because it “exposes one party to risks of alienation and exploitation” (Sutherland, 12).
Sex radicals disagree with radical feminist commercial activity point view. Sex radicals suggest that in commercial sex workers, the variable object is money and not sex. They posit that sex workers and prostitutes are in business activity. However, they proceed to clarify that gays and lesbian are the minorities who have diverted the idea of sex voluntarily thus the concept of exploitation is not applicable to the minority groups. Sex radicals thus differentiate between “oppressed minorities and those who view prostitution as an economic activity” (Sutherland, 13-14)
“Theory related to the role of a sex worker” (Sutherland, 15)
Radical feminists suggest that individuals who engage in commercial sex are more objects and not subjects (Sutherland, 15). The radical feminists posit that the sex workers are too fragile, impoverished, and weak to defend themselves. The radical feminists point that the current sex workers are vulnerable and cannot express the truth about the brutal nature of the so-called work. Feminist radicals suggest that only the former sex workers can tell the true story of prostitution.
Sex radicals, however, indicate that the sex workers have their voice and are in the best position to tell their story rather than be spoken for (Sutherland, 16). Sex radicals cite clash of interest and question the integrity of an individual who represents associations, which they (radical feminist) do not consider to be working.
The two groups have their ideology of defending women in involved in sex work. The radical feminist denies that sex is pleasurable for women, they also disregard the activity as an economic nature, and their ideas are the exact opposite of the theories propagated by sex radicals. However, the two antagonizing group both believe they are working to defend the interest of a woman as far as their theories are concerned.

Work cited
Sutherland, K. (2004). Sutherland, Kate. “Work, Sex, and Sex-Work: Competing Feminist Discourses on the International Sex Trade.” Osgoode Hall Law Journal 42.1, 42(1), 2-28.