So The Independent recently ran a piece by Catherine Murphy of Amnesty International, explaining why the organization is calling for the decriminalization of sex work.
In the comments, someone calling themselves THEMISHMISHEH offers a unique take on the issue.
And by “unique” I mean “seemingly from another planet.”
Shades of Tom Martin, huh?
@snowberry
Fair point. I wasn’t suggesting that turning to sex work when one has no other option is the same thing as being forced into slavery. Though I do consider it to be exploitative of at least some of the people who would be in that category. (And, yes, other jobs that people turn to in desperation are often similarly exploitative. See: sweat shops, et.)
I’m not sure if anyone in this thread would criminalize sex work. I do know that many of the groups opposing Amnesty’s decision do advocate criminalizing it. I also think that the attitude that sex cannot ethically be sold is highly supportive of criminalizing prostitution, and that such an attitude is rooted in extremely sexist notions about what sort of sex people should be having.
That aside, we could confine debate to the Swedish model vs. full decrim. In this case, I agree that the inconvenience to buyers caused by the Swedish system is not a sufficient objection. The problem with the Swedish model is that if *either* side of a commercial transaction is illegal, then the transaction will have to occur in a manner that is hidden from the authorities. This means, that prostitutes in Sweden are in just as much of a lawless zone while working as sex workers in the US. Swedish sex workers are better off when they are not presently at work (since they can more openly advertise and also seek out assistance from authorities without fear of persecution), but while they are working their situation is unchanged. Only full decriminalization brings the entire process out into the open.
In other words, the Swedish model is bad because it isn’t the best system for the *sellers* of sex.
And I agreed with them. Hence, it felt like you were trying to also silence me. I never said you were trying to silence me specifically, but rather you were trying to silence anyone who said you were being a SWERF or a white feminist.
You said, and I’ll quote you:
So, you said that using SWERF was “inflammatory”. You’re accusing people of “throwing out terms like SWERF” as inflammatory, and defended the people who may have been, in fact, acting like SWERFs, with the phrase “I didn’t see any swerfery here”. You are accusing people who “threw out” the term SWERF of being inflammatory.
In other words “You guys are throwing around mean words! I didn’t see anyone doing what you’re saying here!”
Hence why I thought it was tone policing. I don’t want to believe that’s what you’re doing, but it’s starting to look more and more likely.
I understand that some feminists have an aversion to the acronym, but if someone calls you on it, maybe you shouldn’t accuse them of being “inflammatory”, and instead wonder why they said that.
Thanks for understanding where I’m coming from on this Catalpa.
@Catalpa, oh crap, sorry I mixed you with Fnociby due to the similar default avatars
This whole thread is just becoming a big blur for me at this point so I’ll get out before I accidentally say or do anything else bad
Before I get into this: on the issue of legalization/decriminalization/regulation/etc. of the sex-selling industry and sex workers or trafficked people…I have not read enough (or enough from people that I have confidence are representing things accurately) to have a completely formed opinion on it. I’m still researching.
But there’s something that often comes up in discussions of sex work or selling sex that always rubs me the wrong way. Someone eventually bring up that a lot of people work non-sex-related jobs simply because it pays the bills and it’s better than starving and why should sex work be treated any differently?
To which my gut goes…why is our society okay with that? Why, as a society, are we okay with “work this job you’re only just tolerating or starve” as a dichotomy to present to people? Why is the only alternative to starvation work? Hear me out on this.
I know what some people might say, namely, that nobody would work if they didn’t have to, to which I say, baloney. I’m very fortunate (and privileged, thanks to my parents’ social class) to be in a job that I would do if I wasn’t paid for it, as in I did it as a volunteer for a long time before choosing it as a profession (I’m a preschool teacher). There are days that yes, I don’t want to go into work, but I go anyway not just because I need the money to cover rent, but also because I think to myself how my other coworkers will need me or I’m looking forward to the lessons I’m going to teach and how I love the children. In other words, I like my job. It is fulfilling to me not just on a material level, but on an emotional, social, and intellectual level. And it’s awesome. And I want everyone to have that, not just people in my situation.
So if you work in the sex industry, from pornography to actually selling sex, and you love your job and you go to work every day because it’s what you really want to do…I don’t understand that on a personal level, at all, but it’s certainly not evil.
Not compared to mining in Appalachia. Or the working conditions in Amazon’s warehouses. Or any of the drudgery and low pay that characterizes so much retail work. A lot of people are in jobs they hate because it’s better than starving – but anything is better than starving, so that’s not exactly saying much.
I know I’m waxing utopian here (and more than a teensy bit Marxist); we are a long ways away from a Star Trek-style society where people only work if they want to, and it may take Star Trek-style technology and social transformation to make it even possible. And in terms of legalization etc. we have to deal with the reality NOW. But the kind of society I aim for isn’t one where sex is just another service one person performs for another, it’s a society where not working is not seen as inherently inferior to working, where leisure activities are valued, where basic needs are provided for without having to “earn” them, where jobs are satisfying and not degrading or dangerous. Where we’ve changed how we view WORK not just sex work.
I don’t know whether this was helpful at all, or if it was totally derailing (if so sorry :-/) but yeah that’s my two cents.
@nightmarelyre
No worries, I stuck my foot in my mouth in this thread too, and for less excusable reasons on my part.
I agree. I don’t think it’s consensual if a woman’s only employment is sex work and it’s something she doesn’t want to do. I also think it’s a moral failing on the part of any society if a worker is being degraded in any way. That’s why I don’t personally find the term “wage slave” offensive, although I won’t argue if someone else does. It’s wrong to compare things that aren’t slavery to slavery, but if an entire class of people are in a position where they have to do degrading work to survive, that is effectively slavery. We don’t talk about worker’s rights quite as often as we do other social justice topics here, but I think it’s a vital issue.
I hit post too soon. To clarify, I’m thinking of the libertarian argument that it isn’t a human rights issue when a worker is abused or underpaid because they chose to take the job. If the only options are do a degrading job, do crime and risk being jailed or starve, that’s not a choice. That’s coercion.
@PI, not that I’m interested in continuing this, but I’m going to stand by that statement. Some people consider SWERF an offensive term. You are free to disagree and use it as you like as it’s not against comment policy here. I think it’s worth noting that nightmarelyre was I believe the first to use it, and if I’m not mistaken it was based on the assumption that myself and others wanted to criminalise prostitution. I think the accusation that I’m trying to silence you by suggesting maybe we shouldn’t dismiss each other’s opinions as “SWERF” is, frankly, ludicrous. Nobody’s asked you to stop sharing what you think, just to perhaps rethink a term you used.
Another prostitution thread. Okay, let me see if I can thread the needle here. I hope I have enough cred around here to get away with it.
First, I’ve done some sex work. This does not mean that I know anything at all about what it’s like to be a poor Romanian girl shipped into Germany. I don’t, except for what I’ve read. It also doesn’t mean that I’m a policy expert. It does mean that I feel comfortable outright rejecting abstract moralizing of Aunt Edna’s variety. I typed out a rebuttal to “sex is not work, work is not sex”, but I decided not to include it here because I didn’t want to imply that I was trying to justify European trafficking. (Short version, sex is sacred to many people, but everything is sacred to someone, and everyone turns some part of their humanity into “work” to survive)
Second, I’m not committed to a position on the Nordic model. This is partly because I don’t know enough, but mostly because I think every country is different. Each country has its own problems that require their own policies — but more importantly, each country has its own institutions that will implement or resist those policies. Ultimately, I suspect that the nominal top-level policy has less effect on outcomes than mass culture and institutional cultures do. That said, I tend to favor 2-way decriminalization over the Nordic model. (I have a long-form argument for this; it’s based on my discomfort with prosecutorial discretion)
Third. Bina,
I really appreciated your post. It was really eye-opening to get that much detail about the situation in Germany, which I had not followed in-depth. I read enough other stuff previously to believe you on the facts, but I hadn’t seen it all put together like that. I’m not sure I understand your argument for the Swedish model, though. I know your primary point was not to trust Hakim, and I’m with you that far, but I’m wondering if you would be willing to clarify the second bit. It seems to me that neither the benefits you cite for the Swedish model nor the problems you cite for the German model are actually specific to those systems; it’s not clear to me how the Germany situation would be improved by changing the legal code.
If, as you say, the women in German brothels are foreigners who don’t know their rights, don’t speak the language, and are controlled by threats of violence and economic need, how would the Swedish model help them? You say that in Sweden, “The girls know that they can go to police if a john gets abusive, and as a result, the johns are on the run,” but even if that were the law in Germany, it sounds as though the girls wouldn’t know that. Similarly, if “And even those who know they can register and won’t be criminally charged, still won’t register or come forward, because the pimps, traffickers and johns have inculcated them so deeply with shame at what they are doing,” it’s not clear to me what legal regime could do anything for them.
It sounds like the proximate cause of the worst problems is the criminal cartels themselves operating unchecked. In the abstract I would think one could crack down on the traffickers without prosecuting johns or closing brothels, but that’s armchair theorizing; I’m not a law-enforcement expert, so maybe I’m missing something. Are you simply proposing to close the legal brothels, or also to crack down on johns generally, and if so, how would that help?
Perhaps it would be in your best interest to figure out why you find it offensive. All it’s saying is that you’re a feminist who has excluded sex workers.
Why is that “offensive”?
I can’t speak for nightmarelyre, but I think you are mistaken. It didn’t sound like you wanted to criminalize prostitution, only that you were throwing sex workers, and especially sex workers who have come into this thread to share their experiences, under the bus to further fuel your savior complex, and to push the narrative that sex workers are all trafficked young girls, which no one said didn’t exist.
You were straight up ignoring and dismissing what sex workers had to say because you wanted to push this idea that they’re a “privileged minority” and we shouldn’t focus at all on what they have to say unless their contributing to your narrative, even though it effects people like them.
That’s really fucking SWERFy. You’re literally excluding sex workers because their stories don’t fit with your narrative of “prostitutes are mostly sex trafficked young girls and we have to save them!”
Again, not that anyone thinks that girls should be trafficked, or that they don’t exist, but you’re shoving aside people who wanted to correct some very misguided stereotypes.
At least Catalpa understood that this is offensive, and apologized.
I never “dismissed” your “opinion”, I just said I found it to smack of SWERF. Still does.
And yet you won’t give me a reason why I should “rethink a term I used” beyond “I find it to be offensive”. And you’re the only one who has said that it is offensive.
You have yet to explain to me why “some people” (and I’m including you in this because you’re the only one here to make a huge fuss about it) find it “offensive”.
“unless *they’re contributing to your narrative, even though it effects people like them.”
Sorry, it’s late and I haven’t had dinner yet because I have no idea what people are fucking doing at my house today.
Hey David you said here “calling him or her self”, which is erasive on non-binary people (and probably wordy enough to change anyway).
It’s really easy to not assume that we don’t exist by using “themself” or “theirself”.
I live in the U.S., which influences the way I think about many subjects, the topic of this post being only one. To clarify or further explain what I wrote previously –
The general idea being proposed would be to create additional options and make them easier to access in regards to alternatives for employment in jobs that offer adequate pay for someone to live on, offering those to individuals who want to leave any form of sex work they may be engaging in, educating *all* sex workers on what avenues exist so they will be aware of these pathways out should they choose to leave sex work at some point, while also working on ‘fixing’ the way the legal system addresses the many problems currently at issue regarding sex workers, pimps, johns, criminal enterprises which are trafficking people into businesses that are fundamentally designed around exploitation.
Even though these changes wouldn’t make up for the disparity in quality of education that we see in schools across the country; where certain communities have the level of funding to give students better facilities, better textbooks and other learning materials, etc – and others convene classes in crumbling buildings with ancient textbooks and whose arts/music/sports programs have been eliminated or cut back severely – we could provide a chance, a reason to hope for better. I do believe that there are sex workers who have chosen their occupation, who come from good families that live in materially well-off communities, and who are not interested in obtaining some other job – I also believe that there are individuals that some of these things are true for and some are not. In an ideal world we’d start with bringing every school in every community to an equally high standard, allocate the resources necessary for struggling students to get the additional help and change the perceptions about employment in a trade being any less important or necessary than going to college + medical school for us to have a well-rounded and capable functioning society. The providing of a service, be it sexual or as an accountant doing taxes for a business – though many would opt for one over the other, I certainly don’t feel like I should be the one to decide who does which.
A brothel run as a co-op, where the employees themselves have a stake in the business they work in, if properly designed and operated to give the workers more safety and say would seem to be a good option if prostitution and other forms of sex work was made legal.
Many jurisdictions in the U.S. have taken to posting the photos of johns on a ‘website of shame’ – not much different than the online sex offender registry, on which individuals who have been convicted and sentenced to a sex crime that requires putting them onto such a registry stay for the remainder of their lives. First-time johns who have been caught up in a sting (usually, sometimes it’s a first arrest not connected to any specific special task force operation) also have a new option in many areas, in attending ‘john school’ or a similar program they can have the charge of solicitation expunged upon successful completion. Posting their photo online is done by law enforcement and/or district attorney task force prerogative, and a method used as a deterrence – it’s legal for them to do this, and I believe that johns in the area as well as sex workers are well aware that if a john is caught and arrested they can count on having their photo posted. If there were legal means to seek the services of a sex worker, and those means were used rather than a john seeking out the services through illegal avenues operating outside of the ‘system’ there wouldn’t be a need to post john photos for individuals seeking to solicit sex directly from the provider.
Disclaimer: I’m a non-active member of FIZ which is a Swiss Fachstelle Frauenhandel und Frauenmigration (Institute of Trafficking in Women and Women Migration) which lobbies for the right of women migrants and sex workers and offers support for them. I’m also male from a privileged background and I try to be a feminist (not very good at it I’m afraid).
Additionally I have some limited knowledge about the Swiss situation and can’t speak about the Swedish system but I’d like to add some points they made in a “recent” discussion paper.
The paper can be found at http://www.fiz-info.ch/images/content/pdf/2014_diskussionspapier_sexarbeit_fiz_tdf_xenia_cfd_prokore.pdf in German. I also apologize for my mangling of the english language (for example my translation of the institutes’ name is probably grammatically incorrect.)
The discussion paper was made together with 5 feminist organisations though its content obviously isn’t shared by all Swiss feminist organisations and individual feminists.
Personally I agree with most of it in it and where I don’t agree I think my position to be not important enough to disagree as my knowledge is severely limited. Some of the positions in it are very controversial.
1. Sex work is legal in Switzerland. (Although sex workers can’t sue for their pay as it is deemed immoral by the highest court. Which is something that is trying to be changed through various legal bodies.)
2. Forced prostitution and human trafficking are violation of human rights and are prosecuted. (Note from me: Although the prosecution of those are severly lacking.)
3. Even though the reason for sex work often is because of poverty, being refugees, war, conflict, drug addiction, difficult familial situation etc. its not a reason to deny the involved their agency and their ability to make a choice.
The decision for sex work can often be an individual strategy. This is not to be mistaken with point 2 where it is appropriate to talk about victims.
Sex work is transaction between two adult people. Women and men don’t sell their bodies, they sell sexual service.
4. While some sex workers see selling sex as their profession and wouldn’t want to change that, sex work often is not the first choice of those involved in it. For many sex work means discrimination, bad working conditions and health risks. Some of them can’t wait for the day they can stop doing it. Here it is important to mention that this is true for many jobs which are unpleasant, fraught with risk, exploitative and done by the underprivileged.
5. Sex work can be emancipatory on an individual and structural level when it is part of an equal exchange. This is seldom the situation in Switzerland. (Sex work can allow (mostly) women to work for their own livelyhood and acquire economic independence. Thus individually it allows emancipation although perhaps not on a societal level.)
Many sex workers work under precarious and wearing situations. Unsure immigration status and unclear labor legislations, the stigmatic and different forms of gender specific violence can lead to new dependencies.
6. In the view of sex workers who got to the FIZ for counseling ostracism is often a bigger problem then physical violence. Sex work is so unacceptable that most of them lead a double life. The permanent hiding is a psychological stress that can lead to illness.
7. Sex workers are often discriminated against in multiple ways: As sex workers, as women and as migrants. (Increasing the acceptance of sex work is a stated goal.)
8. (The Swedish model is shortly discussed as not working as it forces sex work in the underground and making parts of sex work illegal leads to worse working conditions.)
9. (Lastly they call for making sex work legal, empowering the sex workers.) The reason for the deplorable situation is that the choices for education and work for women is often so limited that you can’t really call it a free choice. It needs improvement that give women in bad economical situations more choices for an income. Investments in education, better promotion prospects and a higher rate of unionisation.
I apologize again for my bad translations and I skipped large parts of the paper. Confusions and if something sounds off its mostly because of my faulty translation.
—————————————————
What I wanted to say with the above is the following. Making sex work illegal or making buying sex work (the Swedish model) illegal won’t improve the situation for those women who “choose” sex work. (Their options they can choose from may be very limited.) If one wants to improve the situation of the women, men and trans people involved one should at least also fight to improve the reason often women have to make a choice that involves sex work. Which is lack of work or lack of ways to get economic independence in a patriarchic society.
Making it illegal won’t change the fundamental reason many have to make this choice, its the easy way out. Even if illegal there would still be sex work but as has been mentioned with just that much worse conditions.
And lastly about human trafficking. If one would really be serious about solving it one doesn’t do by making sex work illegal. Forced prostitution (which is to sex work as an office worker is to a slave) happens where sex work is illegal or even if just legaly discriminated against so that no societal control can happen. Because its forced on the streets, in brothels in industry zones, etc. and the victim there have no way out because the whole sex service trade is seen as something shameful that needs to be hidden. So they have no contact with other people that could help them. And if they go to the police they get at best not arrested for being illegal immigrants but still eventually deported/not given a visa.
If you want to help victims of human trafficking that often get lured by the false promise of legal work, give them that when they ask for help from the police. Give every trafficked person a permanent visa to work and prosecute the traffickers and slavers severly. Instead of spending the police department resources on finding pot growers have them hunt those who profit from human trafficking. Allow brothels in commerce zones and small ones in residential districts just like the small family market and the hair stylist instead of forcing sex workers on the streets because of zoning regulations. Make it something sex workers can talk about openly so they don’t get shamed into silence.
And lets not kid ourselves. The resources we spend on combating human trafficking are shamefully low. The options we give those victims mostly consist of sending them back where they fled from in the first place without giving them better options in the future.
Making sex work illegal; or not even making it illegal, but just making it hard, shameful, something the sex workers have to hide from everybody else doesn’t lead to less exploitation of the ones forced into prostitution.
I apologize for my rant. But this is a topic that makes me livid with rage as it involves people (mostly women and trans people, some men too ofc) that are off the worst in our society and then people (even though well intented I won’t deny) make their lives even worse.
Scary how much THEMISHMISHEH and his ilk hate women. Makes you wonder how they interact with real life women given the way they write about them. And how is legalizing sex work “sexist”? What a twisted argument.
While I’m not an expert, I assume that if sex work is legalized, it can come out of the shadows and be more regulated. That could lead to safer working conditions for sex workers. Legalizing prostitution could also get rid of pimps. Or so it would seem.
@serrafiina Thanks for taking the time to translate. I think you did a good job.
Thanks for spreading my comment and making people think about what I had to say….
I found this website by accident whilst searching for something on google now in 2016 one year after it was written ….I am honestly very surprised…..and I am happy that it has made so many people think about that comment, regardless of what their conclusions maybe….there is no such thing as bad publicity…..
In one year since this article the Anti-feminist population has grown quiet drastically and is still growing exponentially i think… the internet is now awash with us. I am now coming across people who are entertaining my interpretation of prostitution…that this practice is sexual exploitation by women of men and boys for financial gain and as such should be treated with the same level of distain as that of similar crimes of sexual exploitation such as rape. Never did I once think that my comment would have such an impact on so many people….
I hope soon my voice and that of the millions of anti-feminists on the internet, not just on this issue of prostitution but on everything else that we stand for will breach this virtual realm and actualise in the real world that we live in, with an as potent an impact on feminism as we have had here….
The anti-feminist community now dwarfs the feminist voice in this portal that is the internet, especially on websites where people can express their opinions, to some degree, without feminist control….on Youtube, on Liveleak, on Twitter, on Tumblr etc….. and I am very happy about this…..
That’s 6 four-dot ellipses and 4 five-dot ellipses, for anybody playing bingo.
What’s that three-dot anomaly doing in there??
I find the “all publicity good is good publicity.” a fallacy. I also would take a big bag of salt on the outnumber claim. A lot of online support can be falsified.
Without even re-reading the post, I feel confident that his thoughts didn’t make us think, it merely made us mock.
“Only an idle mind and a diseased heart can ever engage in mockery or enjoy it. For only an idle mind not engaged in beneficial work can produce and receive mockery, and only a diseased heart lacking reverence for the Sacred can accept it.”
Indeed, the conduct of feminists speaks volumes for what they stand for.
I very much doubt you have the intellectual capacity to process, understand and appreciate this, but mockery and insults from people who ascribe to your way of thinking only come as praise and confirmation to me.
lol
@THEMISHMESHEH,
An indication of a group that is ready to “actualise in the real world” is not “commenting on the single year-old article about one’s self and bragging about ones’ effectiveness.”
Groups that are actually doing things and making waves are concerned about next month and not last year.
Know what sort of people are concerned about the articles written about them a year ago?
The ones who haven’t accomplished anything since then..
I’d also suggest that you look at the fact that your “accomplishment” here is “being noticed.” The validation of someone else’s attention is your concept of what success looks like, apparently. And well, let’s be honest – validation is nice! We’re all social creatures, and it’s important to remember that. But it isn’t an accomplishment to be mentioned in a blog post. If anything, it’s a nice little side dish to the satisfaction of doing something meaningful, a tasty dessert.
To extend the metaphor – your palette has atrophied. You only want the sugar of validation, you don’t bother pursuing the nourishing bread of real achievement. All cake, no steak.
Come back when you’ve done something meaningful, cupcake. Maybe then you’ll get some ice cream.
The definition of stupidity is to hold on own belief regardless of circumstance. You seem pretty well engaged in that way.
That being said, the contributions of people like you to feminism is pretty huge actually. You’re so repulsive that nobody want to come anywhere near your positions.