GenZedong

Women's bodies will be exploited as long as there is a profit motive. This exploitation often takes the form of objectification, commodification, and sexualization. This exploitation has been normalized and perpetuated through the media, advertisements, and other forms of popular culture. Women are often portrayed as objects to be admired or used for pleasure, instead of being seen as individuals with agency and autonomy. As a result, women's bodies remain commodified and objectified. This exploitation can also be seen in the sex industry, where women's bodies are treated as commodities and are bought and sold for sexual gratification. Prostitution, strip clubs, and other forms of sex work are often seen as acceptable, which further perpetuates the objectification of women's bodies. Communism seeks to abolish the oppressive capitalist system that commodifies and objectifies women's bodies.

We need communism for women's liberation there is no alternative.

The failures of third-wave feminist wrt industrial exploitation of women & the manifest inadequacies of second-wave feminism wrt class/race/the arrangement of exploitation as a base are how I found Marxism. That said, I would probably categorise 'anti-feminism' as a reactionary mentality different to being critical of a particular doctrine of feminist thought - even though 'feminism' without description is a meaningless word.

I appreciate you bringing this up and moving the conversation forward about what is often surprisingly contentious for Marxists about feminism, though (the status of prostitution) - it's important for Marxists to establish a proper line on women's rights (broadly speaking) and not merely mimic liberals on issues that they may not be informed about. The stance you espouse should be utterly uncontroversial.

Another thing that comes to mind as a practical example for Marxists online is the recruitment tactics of OnlyFans and the proliferation of pro-OnlyFans discourse in sites frequented by teenagers and marginalised women.

The argument over whether “sex work is work” always confused me, because either way, the only option is unionization and class solidarity. It feels like a moralistic, abstract debate to me.

It is definitely more vague in cases such as hobbyist or petite-bourgoisie sex workers, but it seems to be the same conclusion of unionization and solidarity either way?

I suppose the argument could be on whether or not it should be illegal, but that doesn’t seem like much of an argument, making it illegal to be a sex worker would make it harder for them to organize, so that shouldn’t be illegal anyways, but exploiting people’s bodies for profit is literally the worst excess of capitalism, so profiting off of sex workers definitely should be illegal. There is no room for ambiguity here.

Women Across Culture: A Global Perspective by Shawn Meghan Burn did discuss about the appropriation of feminist label to mean white feminism and that the white female colonizers claimed to oppose imperialism and women's domination by men of color in the European Age of Conquest when the white women hypocritically support the white patriachal oppression of women of color to gain support from racist sexist white men for white feminism. Although white feminist in Western European diaspora did take some action against men of color, they will disregard the perspective of women of color who face the actual oppression and demand the women of color to submit to sexist white men for salvation.

censorship of even mildly revealing outfits in games isn't a good use of time and effort. the cpc is too prudish a lot of the time.