Having consensual but unwanted sex is not necessarily a big deal for me. I will more often feel empty or sad after agreeing to sex I don’t want with an unpaid partner than I do with a client. Work can be compartmentalized and forgotten. But I still turn over plenty of work-related questions in my head: what does it mean for a man to keep paying to have sex with a woman who doesn’t give signs of enjoying it?
My view (written as someone not involved with the sex industry, which I’m mentioning as part of my standpoint, since this article talks about standpoints - not to situate myself as “better” or “worse”):
"Enthusiastic consent", if it’s going to be a standard, should be a standard for the person receiving it, not the person not giving it. It’s not automatically rape if you don’t give enthusiastic consent. Of course it’s not. Rape is when someone does something which makes you feel violated. Ontologically, it’s rape if (and whenever) you say it is (if you mean it: which women in a victim-blaming patriarchy generally do, as do most others). Besides, even “yes” often only means, "I choose to say yes, understanding the consequences of saying no."
But when a person doesn’t want (as demonstrated by their full behaviour, not just their words) the other person’s enthusiastic consent, I’m suspicious of them. Do they care about whether the other person feels violated? Do they actively get off on the resonances or full-blown reality of the other person’s feelings of violation, or the potential for the other person to feel that way? What’s going on, that, “yeah, I guess” is taken (I use the word advisedly!) as consent? What kind of sexuality is it for which “yeah, I guess?” fails to be a turn-off? What kind of sexuality could be different?