Sex Workers - most wretched girls and women in society

the journalists is Margaret Wente 

here's a link to a response....

http://www.nowtoronto.com/daily/stor...content=193201

Margaret Wente: still plying the world’s second oldest trade

Armed with no particular insight, or apparent knowledge of Canadian law whatsoever, the Globe’s banner moralist decided to write about prostitution this weekend

By John Semley

According to Margaret Wente, Terri-Jean Bedford isn't a real sex worker. This and more!

Sex work, it’s often claimed, is the world’s oldest profession. In this weekend’s Globe & Mail, paid typist and self-confessed plagiarist Margaret Wente made a strong case for hackish moral panicking being the world’s second oldest.

In her latest column, goadingly titled, Legal Prostitution? Are We Nuts? , Wente brings her swollen puritanism to bear on the current Supreme Court case arguing in favour of legalizing indoor prostitution. Calling prostitution, “the most exploitative, degrading work on Earth*” Wente opposes the “feminists and other progressive types” (including the “enlightened classes”) who are endeavoring to make it less exploitative and degrading.

The misleadingly gaping, likely intentional, hole at the centre of Wente’s argumentation is large enough to drive and eighteen-wheeler through. What she doesn’t acknowledge – if she even realizes – is that prostitution is already legal in Canada. So, yes, by Wente’s standard, we are, legally, nuts.

What’s illegal, in one of those Catch-22 type deals that seems to typify too much of lawmaking, is pretty much everything surrounding the act of having sex for money. According to the Canadian Criminal Code what you can’t do is communicate for the purposes of prostitution, “live on the avails” of prostitution, or own, manage, lease, or be found in a “bawdy house.” It’s this sort of patently absurd loophole, which reads like something out of a piece of 50 year-old dystopian fiction, that the current Supreme Court Challenge is trying to close up.

Stargazer!!!

Thank you for being here!

 

I know we're not supposed to shoot the messenger but since the topic of discussion is a commentary article written by Margaret Wente, with emphasis on commentary, Wente is fair game. She's best known as an unimaginative plagiarist socon. Now I seldom read these sort of columns in the Globe or elsewhere and I rarely read Wente but I swear I've read this article before ... did I say unimaginative?

The only readers likely to agree with Wente are like-minded folk who would support any column written by anyone that shores up the abolitionist point of view.

But would not a place where a woman can choose to have an abortion and choose to engage in loveless, procreation-less  commercial sex be a dangerous place? That same woman might choose to use a currently illegal drug, vote, or drive a car.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/human-trafficking-persists-despite-legality-of-prostitution-in-germany-a-902533.html

http://business.time.com/2013/06/18/germany-has-become-the-cut-rate-prostitution-capital-of-the-world/#ixzz2WlONLmLL

http://theprostitutionexperience.com/

 

There is more than one side to this story. The simplistic arguments for legalization ignore reality in favor of philosophy.

The Der Spiegel piece is already being discussed here, with this critique from Feminist Ire.

Hi Pondering!

Okay, fair enough.  How should we regulate it?  What other type of labour or commerce is similar to sex work that we could use for comparison?

Thanks!

I'm looking for some sources to support this (not an easy topic to Google at work).  Could you provide any you have?

Do you believe that there are measures that can mitigate the danger sufficiently?  And if these are examples of the dangers, then aren't we saying that the main problem with sex work is the clients?

i would also like to cHallenge "pondering"'s assertions about rising problems in new zealnd. my understnading is that none of what has been stated has actually occured. 

new zealand does not have legalization, we have legalization here in canada. it doesn't work.

new zealand has decriminalization. that is working really well in terms of stabilizing the safety of sex workers there. 

and if the concern is high school students working in parks, why do they need to be criminalized? if they are being exploited that is already illegal in a number of ways. how does criminalizing sex work help exploited youth?

if you are going to make assertions abou the effects of decriminaliztion i would appreciate it if you posted a link to the proof of your assertion. otherwise its simply more of the same fear mongering from abolitionists that we always see. its a standard arguement which people seem to be prepared to accept with no proof at all and which causes wide spread harm in the discussions about how to stabilize sex worker safety.

i am a person, i deserve the same rights as all canadians. if you want to influence decisions which will affect my life and safety as a human being, please do so carefully and with proof that qualifies as ethical.

nowhere is there research that shows more high school girls are working in parks in new zealand.

i agree with that unionist, there needs to be regulation as in any industry, no one supports a free for all but as you, i believe it should be governed by labour laws, not criminal code.

 

Because commerce and labor are legislated harmful industries can be banned. The amount of damage caused by legalization of prostitution is too severe to justify condoning it through legalization.

Here you go on the topic of child prostitution:

http://www.3news.co.nz/Police-target-child-prostitutes-in-Auckland-City/...

It's illegal but they can't control it. Some prostitutes in New Zealand are happy with the state of affairs but many have not benefited at all and it does adversely affect society. 

Another argument proposed is that it lessens the sigma which has proven to be false. There has been no lessening of the stigma (except under the Nordic model) because the stigma is not centered on the legality of the act.

Another fallacy is that street work moves indoors where it becomes safer. That doesn't happen. Street work flourishes.

Then there is the theory that prostitutes are safer if they have more time to size up a customer before getting in the car. Perfectly nice normal seeming people turn out to be freaks. Desperate drug-addled street walkers will not be aided by legalization.

When I look around the world at various models of legalization I do not see a reflection of the kind of country I want Canada to be. Drive-in stalls for streetwalkers in Germany, windows for Amsterdam, barbed wire for Nevada. While there may be lots of women happily plying their trade there is no denying that there are also many living in misery.

http://www.thelocal.ch/20110908/1098

The Zurich sex stalls will be the first of their kind in Switzerland if the project goes ahead. Ten garage-like booths will be erected in Alstetten, complete with parking spaces and alarm buttons. The model is based on German "performance stalls" set up in Cologne in 2001 where clients drive into the enclosures with their cars to conduct their business.

Women as livestock.

Thanks for the response Pondering, I don't believe we have covered this in babble policy (just checked) or have come to a definitive decision in the babble community either, so I think this is not only a pro-legalization perspective thread. I think we are all capable of having an open discussion about this topic with respect to all involved as has already been shown :)

I used to have the same perspective on sex work -- all women were trapped and that it is not a happy or chosen form of work -- and, to be quite honest, it is something I still struggle with in my own feminism, but I have read and talked to many a person who does not believe that is the case.

There are some women who choose sex work because they believe it provides an essential service to those in need, and therefore, I believe they should have the protections other workers are offered as well.

I'm going to try to hunt down some of those articles I read -- try being the operative word.

the article you linked to is a terrible story involving "about a dozen", to quote the police man, youth at risk. not to down play all of the things that are wrong with that, but that is hardly representative of the "majority " of sex workers in auckland.

these youth are at risk/ being exploited. it is in the sex industry but would be just as illegal in a sweat shop making bridal veils or migrant workers being held prisoner in mansions working as domestics 20 hrs a day.

this does not mean that decrim is not successul in new zealnd and one article about a crisis in support for youth at risk in the city of auckland does not constitute failure of the work being done there.

you go on to once again mention how much street prostitution has not decreased. is that the goal of the nordic model? i thought it was to "end demand", not to punish workers who are impoverish and have nowhere to work....?

you still have not provided any acedemic research or data from a government for example that demonstrates how decrim has failed. frankly, i don't think such research exists.

your "belief" of sex work as soul destroying for the majority is simply that, a belief. a belief that seems to be based on accepting debinked data and myths about sex workers lives.

the closure of brothels has been on going for 100 years. nothing will fix it over night. there are not enough jobs indoors and those workers who used to go on to be madames or business owners in the later years are not so as much for fear of being labled a human trafficker/ pimp/etc.

this has broken an age old tradition of more experienced workers sharing their knowledge with younger or less experienced workers and leaves a shortage of ethical indoor work environments which cannot be fixed over night. especially since we face such opposition at every turn.

cooperatively run safe work spaces have been highly successful in calcutta and we had aspirations of our own for such spaces here.

if you were a sex worker yo would not want outsiders defining your experiences or making decisions that affect your safety. sex workers in canada want decriminalization. by sex workers i mean male female and trans persons currently working in the sex industry. the people who will be affected by the outcomes.

there are numerous links in this forum to reports and information in support of sex workers voices. if you take the time to read through it perhaps you could understnad better our perspective.

I don't think anyone is debating that the number of women involved in sex work not so voluntarily doesn't outnumber those choosing the profession. But, sex work can still be a chosen profession, and to assume those women are still there under some coercion is denying them that choice.

I feel like we have different definitions of "protection" as well.

The laws already in place a terrible (as we can all pretty much agree) and using the "move along line" is dangerous to sex workers on the street, forcing them to move out of safe spaces or to be more invisible.

I'm referring protection as decriminalizing the act of sex work and providing sex workers rights -- for example when they are sexually harassed on the job, they can seek legal action (one small example).

Also, I don't really under why "handicapped people dont have a right to purchase sexual services" or why only that group of people was being used specifically. As SD mentioned, many people (including disabled people) need this service and it is essential. I think it would be great if we could talk a bit more about the perception of the clients as SD as said.

 

Well then it's a good thing I didn't claim that represented the majority of sex workers or prostitutes. I was asked to support my statement about child prostitution. Yes, those other situations are equally illegal. I'm not sure how that relates to the conversation.

This too comes from this article:

http://www.3news.co.nz/Police-target-child-prostitutes-in-Auckland-City/tabid/423/articleID/160528/Default.aspx

"But underage prostitution has always existed; it used to be Hunter’s Corner in Papatoetoe, now it’s Auckland City.

But with the pressure on in Operation City Door, business will no doubt move somewhere else."

The claim that legalization will cure these ills or make it easier for police to focus on just the exploitative part of the industry is unsubstanciated.

I'm pretty sure the goal of ending or reducing demand is intended to result in fewer women working the streets.

Still? This isn't a court of law so I am not going to go searching for academic research although I know that it does exist. This is a controversial issue with two valid sides, not just one. If people are interested they can explore the issue themselves and discover the problems Amsterdam, Australia and Germany are experiencing and weigh their situation against the interests of prostitutes and others involved in the prostitution business.

My opinion is based on a lot of personal research across the web reading about both sides of the issue. It doesn't need to be soul-destroying for a majority. It is certainly soul-destroying for a significant number of women.

In my opinion it damages women's position in society and increases the number of women who are either trafficked or migrant. There are lots of studies substanciating that opinion and no I am not going to hunt them up. There are many ex-prostitutes that speak out against the industry and itemize it's harms, Trisha Baptie for example.

Sounds like a bunch of romanticized hooey to me. There are plenty of massage parlours and escort services operating as brothels. I don't want the business to expand or for young women to be encouraged and groomed to be part of the industry.

Well I'm not a sex worker but that doesn't remove my right to have an opinion on whether Canada should model itself on Nordic model or not. I'm not a libertarian. Individual rights don't trump collective rights.

I don't believe there is a shortage of "indoor jobs".  If the law is discouraging the creation of brothels I see that as a good thing.

I agree with Trisha Baptie and I believe this woman: http://theprostitutionexperience.com/

I met many of you. So many. Too many. And I always wondered about you. I wondered, how could you justify this to yourself? How could you tell yourself – and believe it – that I was happy to have strangers’ fingers, penises and tongues shoved into the most private parts of me? How did you convince yourself that I’d be happy about something you’d never, in your wildest nightmares, wish on your own daughter? I wondered, most of all, how could you look at me and not see me?

Let me tell you who you are: you are the ‘good’ punter. You’re the man who has a laugh with the woman you’re buying. You’re the man who strokes her hair. You ask her how her day’s been. How she’s feeling. Why she’s doing this. Did you ever think to ask that of yourself?

You are the ‘good’ punter. If you see a bruise on her you’ll ask if she’s okay. Is anybody treating her violently? Yes. Many men are. Go in the bathroom. You’ll find one above the sink.

The truth, that you’re so desperate to flee from, is that you are just like a gentle rapist. Your attitude and demeanour does not mitigate what you do. The damage you’re causing is incalculable, but you tell yourself you’re doing no harm here, and you use the smiles of the women you buy as some kind of currency; they allow you to buy your own bullshit. I would know; I doled out that currency many times, and we both were that, we both doled out currency in different ways, you and me.

And this woman:

http://ruthjacobs.co.uk/2013/01/12/in-the-booth-with-ruth-dublin-call-gi...

And this woman:

http://ruthjacobs.co.uk/2013/01/13/in-the-booth-with-ruth-rebecca-mott-e...

"I believe deeply that for many centuries the words and views of the prostituted class has been forced into silence, mainly because the ‘history’ of prostitution has been made in the interest of the profiteers of the sex trade. This means that any language of the prostituted that shows any form of discontent, or that seeks a path to full humanity, is censored. The only language that is allowed to be public is the voice of the ‘happy hooker’ – which is the voice of the pimp and the voice of the punter."

http://www.sextrade101.com/

There are another 12 experiencial voices at that site who disagree with you.

I've lurked around here long enough to be familiar with this debate. I do not deny the existence of women like yourself who consider prostitution to be a valid career choice. I just agree with the survivors that the net effect on women of legalized prostitution is negative.

 

so now i am self deluded? do you have any idea how rude you are? dimissing my experiences and knowledge?

pondering, i frankly don't care to engage in discussion with people who clearly have no interest in the truth or having a meaningful disucssion. if you have done so much research, provide some links to things which prove your assertions.

trisha baptie is part of a group who like to attack us when we speak publically and who will NOT be affected by the outcome of any law reforms. do people experience exploitation? yes. i have experienced exploitation. trisha's experiences are important but so are those of others, the vast majority who, who say their experience was different from hers. to simply accept that her experiences were the norm since they play into your own fears and beliefs about sex work, is not doing the workers who died justice.

the same thing with sex trade 101. my friend went and spoke during one of their "classes" and when she refered to herself as a sex worker, the "teacher" interrupted her and told the class how she was self deluded and that many prostitutes were self deluded and so used the term sex worker....denying her experience, humiliating and degrading her in front of her "class". sex trade 101 is not a good example to say the least about that.

that does not change the fact that the most successful has been and will remain full decriminalization.

it might be useful if you weren't so condesending in your posts. it just makes me not want to discuss with you at all.

the goal of the nordic model is NOT to reduce numbers of workers on street. this once agin shows your complete lack of knowledge in this area. but yet you support it even without understnading it....bizarre....