Lets say one was an industrial worker making textiles at a spinning loom. Every once in a while the fibers get caught in the loom and require manual intervention to untwist the fibers. The boss doesn’t want to stop production so they ask the worker to reach into the loom, next to the fast spinning parts, and unhook the fibers. 99% of the time the worker can do this, 1% of the time they lose their arm and it gets crushed. Should they be allowed to do this? Is it consensual when an industrial worker does something unsafe at the risk of losing their job and not making money?
From the article:
Research shows strangulation is never a safe practice, despite a widespread belief it can be performed safely. Though it often leaves no visible injury, oxygen deprivation, even for very short moments, causes changes to the fragile structures of the brain.
Multiple studies have specifically shown brain changes in women who have been repeatedly “choked” during sex, including markers for brain damage and disruptions in brain hemispheres linked to depression and anxiety.
In most cases these aren’t consenting adults in their spare time. Producing pornography is a job. These people are workers. Workers need protection and regulation from exploitative capitalists who would risk the workers bodies for profit. Is that reactionary?
Good perspective on this, thank you.
I think we can be skeptical that the British state has sex workers best interests in mind with this but the consent argument does not hold up when workers are coerced into putting their health at risk to perform wage labour in the first place.
99% of the time the worker can do this, 1% of the time they lose their arm and it gets crushed. Should they be allowed to do this?
hot take but if a worker wants to do something dumb they should be allowed but if their boss makes them they should be crushed to death in a wine press
Lets say one was an industrial worker making textiles at a spinning loom. Every once in a while the fibers get caught in the loom and require manual intervention to untwist the fibers. The boss doesn’t want to stop production so they ask the worker to reach into the loom, next to the fast spinning parts, and unhook the fibers. 99% of the time the worker can do this, 1% of the time they lose their arm and it gets crushed. Should they be allowed to do this? Is it consensual when an industrial worker does something unsafe at the risk of losing their job and not making money?
From the article:
In most cases these aren’t consenting adults in their spare time. Producing pornography is a job. These people are workers. Workers need protection and regulation from exploitative capitalists who would risk the workers bodies for profit. Is that reactionary?
Good perspective on this, thank you. I think we can be skeptical that the British state has sex workers best interests in mind with this but the consent argument does not hold up when workers are coerced into putting their health at risk to perform wage labour in the first place.
Like I said, I trust the UK government to use this to protect workers about as far as I can throw them.
hot take but if a worker wants to do something dumb they should be allowed but if their boss makes them they should be crushed to death in a wine press
No, this is bad. Workplace safety is a good thing and it’s everyone’s responsibility. There are no libertarians in OHSA.
capitalism’s whole trick is never making anyone do anything but creating the conditions where they will “want” to