I can pay my lawn guy 50 bucks a pop (what he charges) to cut and rake my yard. I could pay the neighborhood kid half that for probably half the quality. I'm still getting the grass cut either way.

Don't know what determines when grass cutting and raking turns into lawn care maintenance besides whether the grasscutter has a business name/license or not. Same for Prostitution...what's the determining factor?

Just as construction workers and the ankle-chained brown-skinned folks who constructed the south are not the same thing.

There have likely always been persons who recognize that they can exploit their sexuality for profit, just as their have likely always been persons who recognize that they can exploit their other skills for profit.

Of course prostitution has hurt men (in the history of prostitution, young boys were often used as prostitutes). Amanda Kloer's blog is the one that argued it hurt women and girls, so you'd have to ask her if she thinks it hurts men, too.

I did say that many prostitutes, madams, and pimps hold jobs that are accompanied by status, autonomy, and power (the attributes of a profession)! My point is that in the history of prostitution, those attributes have frequently NOT accompanied the practice, particularly at its origins. Those are the examples I've used here. If prostitution is going to persist in being called the "oldest profession," doesn't it make sense to question whether the oldest prostitutes were professionals, or whether they were in fact slaves?

You're right about the "skilled courtesans and other so-called 'high-class' escorts" being professionals. Not all prostitutes have been afforded such power, status, and autonomy.

I have never, ever defended the institution of marriage.

The word's origin is Latin, "to declare publically." In that sense, if one says it is their profession, then it is. Most folks today, however, might draw a distinction between a professional (someone who makes a living at it) and an amateur (one who dabbles on the side)--the divide established by committment, skill and client goodwill.

i must say... to imply that someone's vocation is not valid smells of many things... imperialism (is it for you to decide what someone else can do with their body?), paternalistic (assumes your values are appropriate for others), short-sighted (not all sex workers are ignorant, desperate, street hookers), and indeed sexist ("prostitution hurts women and girls." Does it hurt male sex workers?)

Indeed, sex work can be dangerous--particularly those lacking a temperament to maintain psychological balance in such a profession, and/or those engaging with dangerous clients.

Whether a particular sex worker's practice is harmful to them depends on who they are, their work circumstances and so forth; not on some categorical assertion by a blogger.

I would also note that your selective research undermines your argument. You speak nothing of skilled courtesans and other so-called "high-class" escorts, or even marriage itself (women were property until recent times).

just to clarify, Kloer didn't go into a discussion of what is or isn't a profession; I used Wikipedia's definition.

so basically you are saying if a "profession" is shitty enough it does not count. yes it sucks being a prostitute, but it sucks doing lots of things, and some things are even worse than selling your body.