Charges Against Ericsson Summary

Ericsson platform for his article are that there is morally no different between sexual exchanges and the exchanges of goods and services. He covers what he believes are solid defenders of why his position is correct by presenting what he expects other philosophers to have strong disputations. He breaks these up into charges against his own argument attacking this at the defensive. The conventional morality charge , the sentimentalist charge the paternalistic charge, the feminist charge, the commercialization of society charge, and lastly the disturbed emotional life charge. Theses six listed offer different angles but still one perspective. His own views highlight marxist views and states that sex is in demand and necessary within society.
Pateman cutely titles her article Charges against Ericsson to attack what she feels is his weakest point and that is the feminist charge.
What stands out most for Pateman approaches her position with acknowledging that it is not so simple. That these contracts and services enter in on a intimate level of both body and and self. She claims that prostitution does not full a basic need like Ericsson projects, but instead takes away women's freedoms resulting in a sexual subjection that shouldn't be
normalized.

The next being Shrage and Green also bring up social issues with a closer look at society in a less matter of fact manner. Sharge places the male sex drive on trail and doesn't allow that as an excuse for what she believes to be a gross and authoritative patriarchal that harms the woman. Geen goes far back into the homes of the customers and suppliers and claims that no moral upbringing or support would result in the need not the want to prostitution.

Interestingly enough all the selected critics are female. Is possible to have a blind spot when the most common example the man or Ericsson would not be the prostitute but the customer? Perhaps it is easy to have a blind spot when the issue doesn't affect your gender the same way.