So, exploitation is bad, but you don't want any regulation at all to get in the way of your pleasure. Understood. We're not in the 1970s, although I understand trying to invoke a marginalised group for the emotive points. This article isn't about prostitution it's about the pornography industry, different issues are at play.
The article was not anti-union or against workers rights to a safe environment in any sense, it's the opposite. In the U.S. "silenced" seems to mean that someone disagreed with you, which I've always thought to be a very delicate and hypocritical stance. Prostitution and how best to protect sex workers (e.g. is the Nordic model enough) is outside the scope of my article. You can't seem to separate a discussion of pornographers and hosting sites from legal or street prostitution, or even sex for that matter, but again, muddled thinking is a you problem, not a me problem.
You want to pay sex workers, also understood (by the way, you do understand the vast majority want to quit but can't, and the average starting age is while underage...maybe I need to write you a cited article, with "prudish" statistics and "stolen" voices?). Then just to tick you off some more I'll write an article exploring the issues inherent in BDSM and the community, quoting dissenting voices. Sorry, "stealing voices" by writing an article which spotlights voices you disagree with.
You conflate sex with pornography. I understand that some people want to profit from pornography. Sometimes people understand you completely, and still disagree with you. Particularly when their sexual expression isn't confined to paying to watching others act out their fantasy. If people aren't allowed to perform in pornography for a couple of months it pushes them into dangerous street prostitution? Is that your stance? Sounds like they're very, very poor and desperate. Perhaps this ought to concern you?
It's transparent whose "rights" you care about, it doesn't seem to be women's rights, or even the rights of sex workers apart from the ability to petition to legalise prostitution (has the noted effect of driving up human trafficking, particularly in highly developed countries, sorry, just the facts) and to be exploited to the max for your sake. The intellectual dishonesty of slippery slope arguments regarding regulation are beneath my contempt. I don't think I've ever met a person who wants no regulation of pornographers at all. Your selfishness amazes me, and its the "crux" of your argument, whereas mine is a natural flow on effect from research and reason, and basic compassion.
Oh no, not "fierce" and "prudish" opposition. I'm sorry the quotes included... sorry, the sex worker voices "stolen" is something you dislike... perhaps you can read the article and focus only on the research studies? The conclusion is the same. There's no anti-sex agenda, you seem to be the one who wants sex workers silenced when it doesn't suit your pro-porn agenda. How dare they speak out, ay?
A "few" "disgruntled" sex workers is an utterly disgusting way to talk about people who report on poor working conditions and even on-set rape. Get over yourself. You have no idea how common this "ideology" is in the academic, human rights, and public health space, clearly. I also understand that the only feminism you like is the one where men validate women's "empowering" choices only when they benefit them, regardless of the cost to these women or wider society.
Go write a pro-pornography article of your own, harping on in the comments about how much you like watching it is pointless. That's not a cogent argument, nor is a link to some random group shut down in Spain. Your tears over being "kink-shamed" provoke zero sympathy in me, I'm too busy caring about exploited men, women and children.