DISQUS

Dain · 1 year ago

This echoes her book on the visceral reaction of "disgust" and the way it affects politics. I forgot the name...

alex · 1 year ago

just a note to request you change the RSS feed to supply full articles rather than just a two line teaser.

Will Wilkinson · 1 year ago

Alex, I can't actually figure out why my feed is showing summaries, since it's set to show full text. Looking into it, thanks.

Jamelle · 1 year ago

Dain, are you thinking of "Sex and Social Justice?"

Will Wilkinson · 1 year ago

He means Hiding from Humanity: Disgust, Shame, and the Law.

Lee Malatesta · 1 year ago

Nussbaum is arguing by assertion. Every one who takes some action that produces income from murder for hire to digging trenches can be be said to belong to the group where ``all do things with parts of their bodies for which others offer them a fee.'' That much is not in dispute. But to look only at that commonality is to subtly avoid any meaningful debate. Nussbaum doesn't actually offer any /reason/ those who say that that the act of prostitution might be inherently wrong. I could make the same broad claim about murder for hire. But I suspect few people would agree with that claim because of the things that make murder for hire different from most other actions done for income.

Not that I'm arguing that prostitution is actually equivalent to murder for hire. I think they are very different things. My point is that if we use the argument presented by Nussbaum in her op/ed, we don't actually have any criteria by which to say that murder for hire is different from prostitution or any other activity that generates incomee because she appears to have intentionally avoided that question.

My suggestion is that those who would argue about whether or not prostitution should be legalized should first argue about what makes an action just or unjust. And then use the criteria for justice to evaluate the act of prostitution. Nussbaum may have done that elsewhere. She didn't do that in her op/ed.