![liberas calling for violence liberas calling for violence](http://dailyheadlines.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/trump-rally.jpg)
This paper does not attempt to reconcile the tensions that exist among feminist views of the sex trade.
![liberas calling for violence liberas calling for violence](https://images.forwardcdn.com/image/720x/center/images/cropped/gettyimages-493289050-1-1489425023.jpg)
![liberas calling for violence liberas calling for violence](https://transformharm.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/blm-1536x1306.jpg)
Finally, Kingden’s “criteria for survival” (1995) and Nelson’s (1987) notions of valence and position issues are employed to analyze the context in which each group has met with success or resistance. Utilizing notions of master frames, framing resonance, and frame credibility, the essay then explores each group’s successes and challenges in setting the desired agenda. First, Benford and Snow’s conceptions of framing processes (2000) are used to identify how each group has accomplished core framing tasks in pursuit of a specific policy agenda. The emergence of these two distinct feminist conceptions of the sex trade industry and their respective calls to action can be best illuminated by applying the fundamental concepts of social construction scholarship, including collective action framing and agenda-setting. In this way, liberal feminists view participation in the sex trade as work, and in turn call for decriminalization and/or regulation of the industry and may be referred to as “non-abolitionists.” This paper explores the ways in which each set of feminist activists construct their claims, both independently, and in response to one another. On the other hand, liberal feminists argue that autonomy over one’s body includes the right to offer a sexual service in exchange for money, goods, or other services. They therefore argue for the abolition of the sex trade entirely and may aptly be called abolitionists (Saunders 2005). Radical feminists argue that the sex trade is inherently exploitive and an ultimate manifestation of systemic violence against women. Their contrasting snapshots are representative of the two poles of today's feminist debate over the sex industry. In the epigraphs above, Carole Leigh and Kelly offer two very different views of life in the sex trade.
![liberas calling for violence liberas calling for violence](https://www.gannett-cdn.com/sites/scsun-news/images/footer-logo@2x.png)
I’ve felt more in control of my life than I ever did before.” being a sex worker I’ve never felt like a victim –– Carole Leigh from “Telling a Woman/Driving at I was afraid of being tortured or killed.” Finally, the author applies Kingden’s (1995) “criteria for survival” and Nelson’s (1987) notions of valence and position issues to analyze the context in which each group has met with success or resistance. Utilizing notions of master frames, framing resonance, and frame credibility, the essay explores each group’s successes and challenges in setting the desired agenda. The paper draws upon Benford and Snow’s (2000) conceptions of framing processes to identify how each group has accomplished core framing tasks in pursuit of a specific policy agenda. The paper briefly describes how each side has socially constructed issues pertaining to the sex trade industry. It highlights two primary sets of activists and their creation of opposing frames and policy agendas. This paper examines the feminist debate over the sex trade. Work, Violence, or Both? Framing the Sex Trade and Setting an Agenda for Justice From the 2009 issue of the Advocates' Forum