Max Gentle

A tangential and possibly inconsequential thread about cause and effect...

4 posts in this topic

A thought popped into my head the other evening, concerning the anti's persistent linking of prostitution with drug abuse, as if the two are always inextricably connected.

It occurred to me that in those cases of prostitutes who are also drug addicts, then the likelihood is (I assume) that they didn't become drug addicts because they're prostitutes - they became prostitutes because they're drug addicts. They started on the game in order to make the money to support their drug habit.

We all know that there are many prostitutes who are not drug addicts; there may well be (female) drug addicts who are not prostitutes, although I admit that I'm really not as familiar with the world of drug addicts as I am with the world of prostitution and it seems all too plausible that a desperate drug addict (female or male) would go to any lengths to support their habit.

However, the point remains - the connection between prostitution and drugs, where it exists, comes from the drug addiction, not from the prostitution. Yet the current government, through its support for the anti brigade, is trying to stamp out prostitution and implying that prostitution and drugs are very much two sides of the same coin. If they were to completely eliminate drug addiction overnight, there would still be plenty of prostitutes who are not and have never been drug addicts.

They're shooting at the wrong target - like trying to stop speeding by banning cars, or trying to stop drunkenness by banning alcohol. Far better, surely, to promote safe driving or safe drinking, to engage in programmes of education and harm reduction so people can drive, or drink, in a responsible and socially acceptable way. The phrase 'Safe Sex' never seemed so apt!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
However, the point remains - the connection between prostitution and drugs, where it exists, comes from the drug addiction, not from the prostitution.

Unless the girl's dealer pimps her out once she's addicted to pay for her own addiction. Which allegedly is pretty much what happens in many cases.

B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unless the girl's dealer pimps her out once she's addicted to pay for her own addiction. Which allegedly is pretty much what happens in many cases.

In that case, the dealer is using the threat of withdrawal of the supply of drugs to coerce the girl into working, which is as bad as a threat of physical violence, which may well also be part of the picture. In such a case, the drugs are incidental, just another means of coercion.

There may well be many such cases - I'm no expert in this area. However, the point remains that there are many prostitutes who are on the game entirely of their own free will, under no threat of any kind and who are not drug addicts. The continual linking of 'drugs' and 'prostitution' is a deliberate misrepresentation of reality, just like the continual linking of 'trafficking' and 'prostitution'.

I'm not saying it doesn't ever happen but to imply that this is always the case is deliberately misleading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea that that the majority of WGs are working to support a drug habit is often used by the anti brigade. The purpose of this is to show women only become WGs out of desperation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now