I've been loving the Letters to the Editor lately

The whole Spitzer thing through prostitution into the front pages of papers all over (it came to my sleepy burb's paper Saturday, glad to see they're paying attention). And with it people debating legalisation, calling it "victimless" and assorted other comments that show the complete ignorance most people have towards the horror that is prostitution. Not only have there been Op-Eds by prostitution researcher Melissa Farley, but also a very good one talking about how legalisation has increased child prostitution, violence, and trafficking into the Netherlands since they enacted the law while Sweden has seen a decrease since they made selling sex legal and buying sex illegal. You can read this Op-Ed here.

I want to point out some of the best comments (in order of publication):

To the Editor:

I believe that the comments by Prof. Alan M. Dershowitz of Harvard Law School about prostitution were irresponsible and insensitive.

As a second-year student at Harvard Law School, I have been taught by my professors that making hyperbolic, unlikely and unsupported statements, such as Mr. Dershowitz’s assertion that “prostitutes aren’t victims — they’re getting paid a thousand dollars an hour” is irresponsible generally and particularly so when speaking with the press.

Through my Harvard Law seminar on women’s human rights, I have read empirical studies that document that murder, sexual assault and post-traumatic stress disorder rates among prostitutes are much higher than among the general female population, belying the accuracy of Mr. Dershowitz’s avowal that prostitutes are not victims.

Finally, Mr. Dershowitz’s admonishment that resources devoted to ending prostitution should be apportioned to fighting terrorism is insensitive because it ignores the continued economic, racial and sexual exploitation of women and children the world over and seeks to distract us by generating fear.

As such, Mr. Dershowitz’s statements are a disservice to gender equality and the fight to end violence against women and children. Jessica Corsi

Cambridge, Mass., March 11, 2008

To the Editor:

Re “The Myth of the Victimless Crime,” by Melissa Farley and Victor Malarek (Op-Ed, March 12):

In the various political roundtables this week, everyone seemed to agree, at least, on the “victimless crime” argument. I am shocked that the thoughtful, intelligent people (mostly men) on these shows are so comfortable with the idea that a woman would choose to have sex for money.

Do these people know any women? Can they really believe that this is a choice?

We have programs in place to reach out to people who “choose” to use drugs or “choose” to live on the streets, so why do we view prostitution, high-priced though it may be, as just another comfortable, middle-class career choice?

Yes, Eliot Spitzer’s prostitute probably drank fine wine. That doesn’t change the fact that she engaged in a psychologically damaging transaction every day.

I applaud Melissa Farley and Victor Malarek for calling our attention to the one neglected and yet terribly important issue of the Spitzer scandal.

Kathleen Reeves
New York, March 12, 2008

•

To the Editor:

Melissa Farley and Victor Malarek are correct. I would like to add that seeing Silda Wall Spitzer’s stricken face on TV — not to mention pondering what the Spitzer daughters must be going through — shows prostitution to be far from “victimless.”

Patty Quinn
Elkins Park, Pa., March 12, 2008

Here's the latest one that reminded me that I had a lot I wanted to say about this, but unfortunately it's finals and I'm short on time, so I'll let these people (many of whom have raised points I would have) speak for me, and many women who know the horrors that prostitution brings.

To the Editor:

Re “Do as He Said,” by Nicholas D. Kristof (column, March 13):

In the coverage of Eliot Spitzer’s prostitution patronage there has been scant recognition that the exertion of the worst sort of power over a vulnerable person is the fundamental basis of prostitution and its close cousins rape, sexual assault and torture. While sexual acts are indeed often the vehicle, subjugation is the essence. If this were more widely understood, there would be less tolerance of these crimes and less tendency to blame or punish the already victimized.

I am grateful for Mr. Kristof’s continuing attention to these issues in our country and around the world.

Irisita Azary
Glendora, Calif., March 13, 2008

If these arguments don't convince you, take a look at Melissa Farley's studies in prostitution, which can all be found here. I'll leave you with a snippet of her study from 5 countries:

Here is what 475 prostitutes from 5 countries said:

United States: 56% don't want it legal, 88% want out now.

South Africa: 62% don't want it legal, 89% want out now

Thailand: 72% don't want it legal, 94% want out now

Turkey: 96% don't want it legal, 90% want out now

Zambia: 92% don't want it legal, 99% want out now

Will it never end? Proposed brothel for the 2010 Olympics in VanCan

An article from todays Vancouver Sun. (Emphasis mine)

Coalition pushes for legal brothel during Olympics
Ottawa's support sought for safe, prostitute-run facility that would cater to Olympic visitors

Jeff Lee
Vancouver Sun

Sunday, November 11, 2007

VANCOUVER -- A group of Vancouver prostitutes wants to open a "co-op" brothel in time for the Winter Olympics, saying it would help sex-trade workers by providing a safer working environment when the world comes to visit in 2010.

Susan Davis, a working prostitute, said she envisions the creation of as many as five cooperative brothels if the B.C. Coalition of Experiential Communities -- which includes men, women and transgendered sex-trade workers -- convinces the federal government to permit the first brothel on an experimental basis.

The group has support from some politicians, including Vancouver East MP Libby Davies and Vancouver Mayor Sam Sullivan, who believe a brothel owned and run by sex-trade workers would help reduce violence against them.

Now Sam Sullivan won by some very shady stuff by having a candidate whose name was exactly the same name except he used his full name James Green instead of popular and former celebrated mayor Larry Summers endorsed COPE candidate Jim Green where people thoought they were voting for the COPE candidate but instead voted for James Green. I don't like the guy, and he wouldn't have been elected if it hadn't been for the multiple Greens who were running.

Davis said the group is weeks away from incorporating a cooperative corporation and is looking for a possible location in the city's east-side Strathcona area. But she said the group won't open the facility, complete with "quickie rooms" equipped with sinks and a bench, unless it has support from the federal government.

The Strathcona district is located in the Downtown East Side (DTES from now on) which is the part of Vancouver that is plagued with poverty, homelessness, drug addiction, and prostitution. It's also the area where serial prostitute killer Robert Pickton picked up his 46 known victims. Opening a brothel there is not going to help anyone in the area.

"What we'd like to see is an exemption given to us along the lines of what was given for the Insite safe-injection site," Davis said.

She believes tens of thousands of men who come to Vancouver during the Games will be searching for sex. B.C.'s booming construction economy has already brought thousands of workers, and along with them, prostitutes, she said.

"Just like the workers are coming from all over the world to build the city, sex workers are coming with them," she said.

Sullivan, who said the city needs a new approach to dealing with the problems of prostitution, doesn't object to the idea of a co-op brothel.

Again, Sullivan is an asshole. And rather then try to help the women currently on the streets in a productive manner he's buying in to the misconception that decriminalisation and legalisation *actually* make conditions better for prostitutes, which is patently false.

But he said he's more focused on helping so-called "survival sex-trade" workers find cures to their addiction.

"I believe we need to keep an open mind," he said. "But I don't believe it would address the needs of the survival sex trade. I don't think a brothel of this kind would even allow women like that into it, because they come with lots of problems."

It has been documented that many sex workers do not start out as addicts, but become addicts to deal with the abuse they suffer because of prostitution. Goldstein estimated that 40% to 85% of prostitutes were drug users; in addition, he reported that among higher class prostitute women, prostitution tended to precede substance abuse, while in lower class prostitutes, the reverse tended to be true (Goldstein, 1979). James, alluding to data from an unpublished 1976 manuscript, stated that "Prostitution follows addiction in 48% of the subjects, precedes it in 38%, and is simultaneous in 14%" (James, 1977).


Opponents of the brothel say it would only perpetuate the idea that prostitution is acceptable, and not solve the abuse heaped on women in an industry most of them don't want to be in.

"It entrenches prostitution as legitimate, and therefore legitimatizes pimps and traffickers," said Daisy Kler, a social worker with Vancouver Rape Relief. "I do not believe the public would agree that this is a good idea, to have some disposable women available for the Olympics."

Last week, Calgary-based The Future Group released a report warning that Vancouver's Olympics will be a target of human traffickers wanting to exploit prostitution. The report, titled Faster, Higher, Stronger: Preventing Human Trafficking at the 2010 Olympics, said the federal and provincial governments need to deter traffickers from using the Games to profit from human misery.

Janine Benedet, an associate professor of law at the University of B.C., said the city already has hundreds of brothels. The only difference is that they operate illegally. Bringing in one for the Olympics, she said, is wrong.

"To the question, 'Is society ready for this?' my answer is, 'I hope not,'" said Benedet, who lectures on sexual violence. "The notion that this is somehow different or better than any of the other brothels out there is simply false."

Studies show more than 90 per cent of women in the sex trade are not there by choice, but rather because of trafficking, drug addiction and societal problems such as incest.

Benedet said the majority of Vancouver's prostitutes are native women, and many of them suffer from deep psychological trauma. Davis said a brothel run as a cooperative would not turn away prostitutes looking for a safe and clean place to do their business.

From the article linked to above under the word "false" (though actually on page two comes these facts:
United States: 56% don't want it legal, 88% want out now.

South Africa: 62% don't want it legal, 89% want out now

Thailand: 72% don't want it legal, 94% want out now

Turkey: 96% don't want it legal, 90% want out now

Zambia: 92% don't want it legal, 99% want out now

Amazing that pro-prostitution people bandy about how "legal" means safer and is what prostitutes want. I'd say that the study shows that prostitutes *don't* want prostitution to be legalised.

The trial of Robert Pickton, who is accused of the first-degree murder of 26 women, all of whom were either survival sex-trade workers or addicts, amplifies that point, she said. (see above)

"It would be better to be working inside in a bad place than it would be to be outside and getting killed," she said. "Our main focus is to help the adult prostitutes. We're focusing on the Downtown Eastside first because that's where so many of them are getting killed."

So why don't we address the real problem: that these women are seen as disposable. Many cities do not even investigate missing prostitutes until the numbers reach the double digits, which shows just how much these women are valued in society, i.e. they have less value then an unprostituted people.

Davis said the co-op has the support of federal politicians, including Davies, Liberal MP Hedy Fry and Senator Larry Campbell, the former Vancouver mayor. Davies said she supports the coalition's idea of the co-op, and also wants to see prostitution decriminalized. (again, see above)

Society's prohibitionist stance against the sex trade hasn't solved the problem that men continue to seek out women for sex, she said. While she is opposed to child prostitution, she doesn't think adult prostitution should be illegal.

"Where there is sex between two consenting adults, even if there is money exchanged, I don't think the state should prohibit it," Davies said. "I think even the police would agree that the current situation is not tolerable, and that we need safer conditions for sex-trade workers."

But Vancouver police department spokesman Const. Tim Fanning said a brothel can't legitimize an industry that completely victimizes women.

"You can call it what you want, but prostitution is just a breath short of slavery," he said. "These women are not in it by choice. The police department would in no way support anything like a brothel."

WOOT WOOT! Unfortunately I am shocked that a Constable actually understands what prostitution does to women, but it is a very welcome surprise.

Davis said better "exit" strategies are needed to help prostitutes who want to leave the industry. But she thinks prostitution as a whole should be accepted instead of stigmatized. She said as an example, she services many elderly men whose wives either won't have sex with them or who are widowers and don't want long-term relations.

Isn't that sweet. A modern day Mother Theresa. *rolleyes*

But Kler saw Davis's proposal as a thinly disguised attempt to legalize an industry she sees as akin to slavery.

"Fundamentally, it's not the laws that kill, beat and rape women, it's men," she said. "The mantra in this city is that it's safer, it's safer, it's safer. We fundamentally see prostitution as a form of violence against women. If you are coming from a women's equality perspective, as we are, fighting for the equal status of women, we see that there is no benefit to women as a group to legalizing or decriminalizing prostitution." (did I mention that Daisy kicks ass? but then again, Vancouver Rape Relief also kicks ass)

The idea of brothels is not new to Vancouver. In 2005, then-councillor Tim Louis suggested the city should open one to support prostitutes as long as it didn't make money from it, prompting Sullivan, then a mayoral candidate, to say: "The goal should be to help these women get out of the survival sex trade, not keep them in it. I'm running to be mayor to help people, not to get into the business of being a pimp."

But the approach of the Winter Games has brought the issue to the fore again. The Olympics, like many major sporting events, traditionally generate a boost in prostitution.

Victor Malarek, author of the best-selling book The Natashas: Inside the New Global Sex Trade, said more than 40,000 women and girls were brought to Athens for the 2004 Summer Games.

For the 2006 FIFA World Cup in Germany, more than 20,000 women were imported. In both countries, prostitution is legal, but the vast majority of those brought in were foreigners from countries like Moldova, Romania and Ukraine.

While Canada's immigration laws and visa requirements will prevent many foreign prostitutes from being trafficked in Vancouver for the Games, Malarek says the reality is that the 2010 Winter Games will be no different than other Olympics.

"You're going to open up a Pandora's box if you allow even one legal brothel," he said.

Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day, the federal government's senior minister in B.C., and the Vancouver Organizing Committee declined to comment.

jefflee@png.canwest.com (to contact the author of this article)

To learn more about what pornography (taped prostitution) and prostitution are really like you should visit (for starters anyway):
Prostitution Research and Education
Against Pornography
Polaris Project
Factbook on Global Sexual Exploitation
Coalition Against Trafficking in Women International
Genderberg

Jersey Jaxin on why she left porn and the abuses of the industry

Yes I know, do we really need to keep posting things about how women in the industry are harmed? Well since a lot of people don't listen the answer is YES. I know I'll keep screaming until people actually hear me. My words and other brave bloggers words about their experience in the sex "industry" have been glossed over as "odd" stories, since everyone know that the sex "industry" is just good sexy fun, right?

Yet again a woman who worked in the industry tells us a resounding NO. Yet again I am silmultaneously moved to tears and angered beyond belief by the stories of another woman (and you know for all the women brave enough to speak out there are a cadre of women with the same experiences who don't (and I understand that...it's not easy to talk about abuse)) who has been abused, used, disrespected, and treated like nothing more then a few holes.

To all you "good sexy fun" believers AGAIN I ask: HOW MANY WOMEN WILL IT TAKE TO CONVINCE YOU THAT PORN IS HARMFUL TO WOMEN? HOW MANY? At least give me a number, I bet I could find that many women. Just tell me, WHAT WILL IT FUCKING TAKE?

Ex-porn star Shelley Lubben interviews Tanya W. (porn name: Jersey Jaxin) about her decision to leave porn and the horrible conditions that she was working in.

Part the first:


part the second:


From Shelley Lubben (now, I hate WalMart (and Target slightly less) but in this instance, if I could, I would send a gift card):

"I want to give Tanya some relief from the many years of suffering she has endured. She has only known pain and abuse since she was a little girl and now I want all of us to reach out to her. She is moving to another state where there are mainly Super Walmarts. If you would like to help Tanya as she begins her new life please send Walmart and Target cards to my PMB Box and I will forward everything I receive to her as soon as I receive them from you.

Let's keep helping the porn stars rebuild their lives! YOU are making a HUGE difference in the lives of women by your giving.

Tanya already sends a BIG THANK YOU to us for your support and love as she courageously rebuilds her new life.

You can send the Walmart cards here to my post mail box at:

Shelley Lubben
PMB Box 33
6077 Coffee Rd 4
Bakersfield, Calif. 93308

Or if you'd like to help in some other way please visit my web site here. (Also you can see the other women that Shelley is trying to help and lend some support or a hand (there are non-monetary things like finding lawyers, translators, etc)

Thank you SO MUCH for caring about the porn stars! Love, Shelley"

Now I know Shelley is one the Christ train, and I fear people will react by saying: "oh she's just religious right." To that I say, how many people in the religious right are ex-pornstars and how many actually want to *help* people leave porn? Seriously, what she's doing is wonderful for anyone. I don't care if she calls herself the one true god, she is doing much more then most people in our society, helping the abused and battered women get a life outside of the abuse (porn).

Hat tip and more info: Anti-Pornography Activist Blog

Porn again, porn again

This was in the anti-porn LJ community, and I thought I'd pass it on.

'm not requesting to join the community because I don't feel I possess the right attitude for it, but, I did find an article in this month's issue of FHM in England (of all things!) about why one man had given up porn, and I typed up most of it because I thought you and/or the members might be interested in reading it. (Were my scanner capable of scanning magazines without blurring the text to buggery, I'd have scanned rather than typed, but there you go):


[just skipping to the main bits of interest, really]

Then the internet arrived. Designed to be a force for good and to share the knowledge of the world, it was immediately used, of course, to spread images of people having sex. The filth travelled around the glove like those ocean-going barges stacked high with rotting garbage. Only this was muck that everybody wanted, that found a welcoming port in every corner. In mine too.




Along with most other red-blooded males, I gleefully downloaded the photos, saw the pussies of Pamela, Paris and Abi. I cruised the sites and eyed up thousands of girls from every nation and in every position. When broadband arrived, I thought, "This is it, Utopia, a constantly refreshed supply of beautiful women, naked and performing for our pleasure." Now we are all sultans.

(Some talk about his nephew and how his nephew'll never have to buy a porn magazine from a shop because it's just a click away on the internet. Also mentions that the nephew in question is 13)

But slowly it has become clear to me that I'm the lucky one after all, not him. In fact, I regard anyone who watches porn these days as being incredibly unfortunate. Why? Because it's going to poison your mind, mess up your relationships and ruin your sex life.

That may seem like a sweeping statement, but I know it's true because it actually happened to me. Nothing I'm about to confess is based on bland statistics or boring surveys or government research - it's based on the fact that, in bed with a woman one night, I did something which caused her to feel fear and pain. I practically became a sex offender. And porn was to blame.

My transformation from nice guy to near-rapist began when I got into the habit of kicking off each working day by watching a bit of hardcore. I thought of it as my equivalent to a cup of coffee. A pick-me-up. Five minutes of online ogling before settling down to the grind of earning a living.

(explanation that 'hardcore' in this case wasn't referring to anything underage or illegal, so it's not as though he was watching 'the shit with animals and torture and dungeons', but the regular stuff often watched online)

The participants seemed to be clean and willing, and their activities appeared innocent enough. Certainly, I never felt I was being perverted by them, especially as my favourite one, called "Her Sweet Hand", was entirely devoted to women giving hand-jobs. In my view this was only "second base" and therefore hardly pornographic at all.

If you'd asked me back then if watching these clips was affecting my sex life, I'd have said, "Yes, but in a good way." The way I saw it, my libido was getting charged up like a car battery, so when I pulled a girl I would be raring to go. She'd get better sex, and I'd get a chance to act out some of the scenes I'd watched. Everyone's a winner.

After a while, however, I noticed I was getting much more dominant in bed. Previously, I had been a pretty democratic lover, happy to share the workload in the three classic positions, but now I found I was doing a lot more doggy style. I would do it harder, too, and while I did it I would pull the girl's hair and think, "Yeah, you're getting it now, you dirty little bitch." If sufficiently emboldened by drink, I would actually say those words, and plenty more besides. Then, after showering her who was boss for half-an-hour or so, perhaps pinning her down by the wrists for variety, I'd climax. But whereas in the old days, I was happy to come into my Durex or on her tits, now it had to be all over her face and neck like a white volcano.

(the segment preceding this is mostly just reiterating what's been said before and not that interesting)

I can only guess how far down that track I'd have gone if I hadn't been snapped out of it. But luckily - for me, anyway - I pulled a girl at a party and then went too far. Far too far. We got pissed, cabbed it back to my place and then I gave her the full Beast of Hammersmith treatment. I remember talking filth, going at her like a merciless jackhammer, when she first asked me to stop.

I didn't stop. In fact - and this is the hard bit to confess - I gave it to her even harder. One... two... three strokes, riding the wave as she squirmed underneath me. I was engorged with power, my cock a weapon. But then she wrenched away from me, and I could see by the look on her face that A Bad Thing had happened.

It took a lot of fast talking and soothing hugs to calm her down. At one stage, I thought she might actually report me. When she left, I shivered under the duvet, shocked at what I'd done.

What had I become? And why? I had never acted like this before, so I deduced that it might be due to the internet porn I'd been feasting on. The next day, I visited some of the sites I'd used regularly. And slowly, just as a secret image used to emerge if you stared at those old fractal pictures long enough, the truth became clear.

Modern porn... it's not about sex at all. It's about cruelty to women. Almost all of it, especially the most popular "gonzo" king, is built on their humiliation. Again, let me stress that I'm not talking about the extreme stuff here, I'm talking about the mainstream. Your basic, entry level porn.

The problem stems from the fact that porn gets stale very quickly. There are only so many ways a man and woman can make love, so the adult-video makers have to up the ante constantly to maintain sales. Once, you never saw penetration. Then anal sex was a taboo. Now it's pretty common to see triple anal penetration. As one porn director put it, "People want more. They want to know how many dicks you can shove up an ass. It's like Fear Factor meets Jackass."

Precisely. It is like Jackass. Painful and demeaning things - like getting cornhold or throat-fucked - are happening for our pleasure. And the discomfort shows on the women's faces. They get hurt while we whack off. Looking back at my favourites with fresh eyes, I saw it clearly. Even in the "innocent" hand-job one, they worked without being pleasured themselves. They ended up been coated with spunk. They were, quite literally, sex objects.

You want to know the really worrying thing? Porn is a multi-billion dollar industry, famously bigger than Hollywood, and if the sight of women experiencing discomfort or humiliation was distasteful to the mass audience, it would have been edited out. Market forces would insist upon a correction. So the only conclusion to draw is that normal guys - not a tiny minority of perverts and weirdos, but you, your pals, your brothers, your colleagues - actually like seeing it.

Well, not me. Not any more. I've seen what they're selling and I don't want to buy it. And I warn you, everytime you watch a gonzo clip from "Meatholes" or "Exploited Babysitters" your subconscious is being bombarded with the same message. You won't so much get brainwashed as braindirtied. And then - like it or not - there's a chance you'll bring what you've viewed into your real-life relationships. Monkey see, monkey do.

Personally, I'm now only going to use the computer for e-mails and poker. If I want porn, I'll stick to the older kind where everyone appeared to be having fun. Say what you like about '80s porn movies, at least I know I'm never going to end up like the blokes who starred in them. Mainly because I hate moustaches...

(emphasis mine)

First off I'd like to point out that he's a rapist. No matter how many hugs or whatever he gave her and even though she didn't report him does not in fact mean that it wasn't rape. He admitted to continuing after she said no. He admitted that he thought she would report him. He is a rapist.

While he doesn't realise that all porn is dehumanising and degrading to women, he does come to a very real conclusion. Time and time again men tell the same story, but do we (usually) hear it in media other then feminist magazines or in forums other then the feminist blogosphere? A resounding NO. Many of the people Pamela Paul interviewed for Pornified said the same things, and about how they were no longer to sustain erections with a woman unless they envisioned the degrading images of pornography. However mush they want to sweep this shit under the rug, there are always people willing to tell their stories, be they women who escaped the industry (like me) or men who have come to the realisation that porn turns them into sadistic assholes. While I disagree with him continuing to look at porn, bravo for him for publishing this in a lads mag that glorifies the pornification of women. Hopefully more men will be brave enought to stand up to this.

Why am I anti-pornography?

I think Gail Dines does a great job of talking about the misogyny, normalisation of pedophilia, and racism in porn. This video is about an hour long, but I think it's a great introduction to the harms of pornography.

Pornography is to sex what McDonald's is to food.

New favourite blog

Anti-Pornography Activist

I just got through watching all the videos and I must say I LOVE this site. Thank you to whoever you are out there writing it. It's given me great information I wouldn't normally have found (like excerpts from Jenna Jameson's book).

Although I would like to note that I don't agree with this:
13. Report pornography that you encounter or are aware of that qualifies per the legal definition of Obscenity here at the form for online pornography and the forms for offline pornography. Information of what qualifies as Obscenity is here under the heading “Summary of Obscenity and Related Laws”.

For reasons like this:
WE OPPOSE ANY OBSCENITY LAW OR REGULATION OF THE INTERNET. NO IFs ANDs OR BUTs.

Leagalisation of prostitution does nothing to alleviate abuse

Turkish political candidates talk about how legalised prostitution does not mean better circumstances for prostitutes.

"They talk about domestic violence, but it was the state that beat us up," she says, in the stuffy, shabby office that is serving as her Istanbul headquarters.

Frequently breaking down in tears, she goes on to talk about 18-hour working days in the brothel, social security payments withheld, even murder.

"Serpil, mother of three; Fatma from Diyarbakir; Hatice from Izmir; all three were killed while I was inside and their deaths passed off as overdoses," she says. That was the rule for disobedience, she explains: first, a beating, then rape, then murder.

"We're not here simply to get attention," Tukrukcu says. "We're here so that people know the truth about all these things."


Two women are bravely overstepping the public taboos against former and current prostitutes by running for office. They seek to ban prostitution, focusing on the state-employed prostitutes that both were pushed into. Their stories, like the one above show that it doesn't matter if prostitution is legalised and regulated (like the state sanctioned brothels in Turkey) that prostitutes still fall victim to rape and abuse, and even murder, which is the same problems that women working as prostitutes the world over have problems with.

I hear a lot from people who support the legalisation of prostitution saying that it will make conditions better for prostitutes. There are not many places where prostitution is legal, so looking at Turkey's problems with prostitution give us a glimpse into how legalised prostitution works. The bottom line is that it is no safer then illegal prostitution.

Now I do not support the arresting of prostitutes. This I think is a crime. These women all ready have enough problems without having to deal with the law. I support the Swedish Model which criminalises the buying of sex and decriminalises the selling of sex. The also offer programs to help the women integrate into society by offering a plethora of job skills for them to learn. And those are the people that should really spend time in jail: the johns. It is not the woman's fault for needing to sell herself to get by, but it is the john's fault for raping these women for money. When mens demand for women to be accessible for rape on demand diminishes then we will see prostitution disappear. But this means that we need an equal society where women are not treated as the sex class, but instead seen as fully human.

Weighing in on Ipswich

I ususally get my news from cbc.ca, but I had the news on while I was cooking today and I'm pissed. Girls? You mean to tell me that they're all under the age of 18? And do we have to place so much stress on the word prostitute? GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.
Stated here much more elquently then I could:

The Ipswich murders: they were women, weren't they?
Matthew Parris

Prostitute is a noun and a useful descriptive term, but is it the right word to use in a headline reporting the death of a woman? “Another prostitute murdered” — yes, she was murdered and she was a prostitute, but she was a woman first, a woman of whom you could have said so many things if you had known her, only one of which was that she worked as a prostitute.

I am not advocating euphemism. Woolly words such as “sex worker” will soon attract the same opprobrium as the terms they replace, and lose their wool. Nor am I suggesting we hide what those women in Suffolk did for a living. It is central to the case, it is what has linked the murders, and in a grisly way it fascinates. Any report should be unsparing and the language honest.

But in the headline, in the opening sentence, couldn’t we at least start by calling a victim what she mainly was: a woman? Some words seem to push a person away, to make them other than us. We ignore our common humanity when in the very naming of a person we launch straight into a descriptive term drawing attention to difference and inviting shame.


Read the whole thing here.

But then again, we prefer the othering, the thought that only discarded women are in danger. They thought the same about the Yorkshire "Ripper" but then he murdered mostly "women" not prostitutes. Words are powerful, and I'm sick of these women being posthumanously (and all the women in the sex industry still living) othered and discarded. (Not to mention all the women not in the sex industry who are also othered and discarded.) Blech. I hate it here.

Fuck you patriarchY!

Some thoughts on strip clubs

The impeccable Reclusive Leftist wrote a post that ended with this question:
Wouldn’t it be great if all the feminist battle units could lay down arms, abandon their entrenched rhetorical positions, and start talking afresh on what we know, what we can agree on, and how we might work together to help the sex workers who are out there on the front lines getting battered daily by johns and pervs and pimps?

Because many of us involved with the porn wars know, is that we sometimes get painted with being anti-sex worker because we're anti-sex WORK. (Work does not equal worker, btw.) Which is patently untrue.

I know that in my case I am not only a radical feminist, but I am also a delegate for the Industrial Workers of the World. While it is a radical union, it is not the bastion of forward thinking and equality that one would hope for, so when I proclaim that I am a feminist (loudly and often) I am asked what I think of the workers at the Lusty Lady who unionised, and if I am against unionisation of strip clubs because I am against strip clubs. Well, that's oversimplifying and is pure and utter bullshit. The answer I give that seems to be etched into my memory now is that I am all for unionising strip clubs. They are horrible, degrading, and often dangerous places to work (for reasons mentioned by a stripper at Violet's post that's linked above). I want the workers to be able to make them the best and safest place that they possibly can (which is still scary given the way the customers view women), but that this is only one small step. Like the ideas of the IWW I want to get rid of the bosses and only have worker collectives. Well, we can't make that happen overnight, so a union is a way to help put more control in the workers hands, for now. The IWW is not satisfied with just unions as I am not satisfied with replacing strip clubs with unionised strip clubs. Yes, one is better then the other. Yes, sex workers are workers, and ones who work in a very dangerous environment that they should be able to make some rules and make their experience better. So for now, I am all in favour of unionisation. But that's only for right now. I imagine a world without strip clubs, where women are no longer the sex class.

Which brings me to other questions. Who would want to salt a place like that? (Salting is where you get union members hired into a job that you are trying to unionise.) I (years ago) thought about it, but I've definitely healed past that point and can't shield myself from the degredation and humiliation any more. (Thank god. I am done dissociating. NO MORE.) Seriously, I have little problem finding people interested in salting Starbucks, but I couldn't imagine asking any woman to salt a strip club. I'd even salt at (*retch*) Starfuckerbucks, but it's different. I can't imagine asking a woman to go through that for the good of a union.

ALSO: Because I've met many men who seem to think that going to a unionised strip club is better then a "regular" strip club: you're all misogynist bastards. Don't go to strip clubs. Try this on for size: see women as something more then a masturbatory tool. They are human, just like you (I know some of you can't believe that.) See them as your equal. Try that instead of a strip club. It's much more fulfilling.