Actually wanted to add some thoughts regarding the media and the whole Sugarbook's guerilla marketing while at @zurairi's news recap on Clubhouse just now tapi tak sempat, so here it goes:

This is merely a suggestion but I feel like the media can still use their content but shift it towards questioning their main client, sugar daddies. It's also a good opportunity to bring up the stigma surrounding sex workers(SW).

Although the app markets it as a dating site, it's an open secret that boils down to SW. We have to understand that the power dynamics are there to protect daddies. Personally, I feel like what SugarBook did is inappropriate.

They are exposing stats and now causing unnecessary crackdown on babies, especially those in universities - kinda showing how little security they have.
Since SW is still illegal, making it a non-taxable income, perhaps that's one of the factors why MOE laju je nak ban.

The vast majority of sex workers choose to do SW because it is the best option they have. Many sex workers struggle with poverty and destitution and have few other options for work.

Some find SW offers better pay and more flexible working conditions than other jobs. And some pursue SW to explore and express their sexuality. Just like any other job, there are many reasons why people pursue it.

We have to remember that "sex work is work" does not mean that it is good work, or empowering work, or harmless work. HOWEVER, sex work is not inherently harmful, but criminalization and stigma do make sex work circumstantially harmful.

Perhaps the media can shift the narrative using their content or am I just wishful thinking again?

also shoutout to @ilsorareema for speaking on this at Clubhouse, I know you nervous. You'll do better next time!