bacchus

Guardian Article: We won't stop fighting the sex industry

20 posts in this topic

From the Guardian's Comment is Free, Cath Elliot bemoaning the 'watering down' of the prostitution clauses in the Police and Crime Bill:

But as with any attempt to institute social change, we know that this one's going to take some time. Feminist campaigners may not have achieved everything we'd hoped to through the current bill, but that doesn't mean we're about to give up. We're determined that one day we will be able to live in a society where a whole class of women has not been set aside to be bought and sold, used and often abused, in a global industry of sexual exploitation.

It's because of this refusal to give up, and this commitment to exposing the sex industry for what it really is , that on Wednesday afternoon Eaves and the campaign group Object launched their new initiative, Demand Change, in Portcullis House, Westminster. And yes, that is my name on the list of guest speakers: I'm really proud to have been able to contribute to such a great campaign.

Full article here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jun/26/sex-trade-prostitution-bill

Demand Change website: http://www.demandchange.org.uk/

B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So when the next Labour government is elected start your campaign again. All the existing crowd. Harman, Smith, Taggart will be long gone. The Conservatives and Liberals could not care less.

Of course if the Lords committee spend any more time discussing interesting matters such as who chooses the next Met Police Commissioner the bill might not get passed by the next General election.

They could also follow Baroness Miller's suggestion and scrap the clauses entirely. Funny how there is no mention of this coming from another lady.

Did Fiona McTaggart and all the other big names promised turn up for the meeting? Perhaps their invites got lost in the post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From the Guardian's Comment is Free, Cath Elliot bemoaning the 'watering down' of the prostitution clauses in the Police and Crime Bill:

...

Full article here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jun/26/sex-trade-prostitution-bill

I've just posted a comment.

I think the anti campaign has been seriously, perhaps fatally, weakened by a number of factors, not least being the recent political uproar over expenses etc. No-one cares very much now about what is, essentially, a minority campaign by a small group of extremists - they're all too busy trying to shore up their own dodgy footings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hear that a Union delegation on behalf of working girls did in fact attempt to attend a public meeting held by these feminazi harridans and were prevented from entering with the phrase :

"To allow you people in here would be like allowing the BNP to attend a Stephen Lawrence Memorial" !!!! :D

What price democracy when people like that are in charge??

It is well past time that our Community was allowed to put our side of this argument.

We are almost to a man (Or woman) totally against trafficking in the real meaning of the word but we certainly dispute their statistcis which are meaningless made up garbage and their interpretation. In fact, we believe because of this they are alienating the very people who are in a position where they might be able to supply aposite information to allow evil people to be apprehended earlier,in short, by their unblievable rantings and lies they are obfuscating the core problem and just adding heat rather than light.

I say "almost" above, as like any community, there will always be the odd one or two hiding among us who has evil intentions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I hear that a Union delegation on behalf of working girls did in fact attempt to attend a public meeting held by these feminazi harridans and were prevented from entering with the phrase :

"To allow you people in here would be like allowing the BNP to attend a Stephen Lawrence Memorial" !!!! :D

What price democracy when people like that are in charge??

Not to mention a completely flawed analogy, as it is WGs that the feminazis purport to be protecting, so really it would be like them preventing black people attending such a memorial, or that they were discussing preventing black people from walking the streets in order to prevent racially-motivated attacks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What price democracy when people like that are in charge??

A point recognised by at least some in Parliament, as noted by epidemiologist and writing on the sex industry (amongst other subjects), Elizabeth Pisani writing in the July issue of Prospect:

The debate gave a fascinating glimpse into British democracy. Discussion of a law that may mean life or death in the sex trade, and that threatens men with arrest for an offence that is not clearly defined, was sandwiched into a couple of hours. The government bangs its drum on “evidence-based” policy but failed to present any evidence that locking up prostitutes’ clients will reduce trafficking of women. Labour’s John McDonnell summed it up well: “We not only do not give ourselves the time to discuss legislation, but we legislate in absolute ignorance of the facts of what is happening on the ground... This is no way to run a country, is it?”

It is well past time that our Community was allowed to put our side of this argument.

Pisani goes on to argue that the IUSW, along with the English Collective of Prostitutes, police, health professionals etc has been instrumental in achieving the change in the law:

Catherine is an activist at the International Union of Sex Workers, which has for years, together with other groups like the English Collective of Prostitutes, organised press briefings and public meetings. In the face of this bill they met MPs, gave evidence before committees, and presented data (which the government had not released) showing that while blanket laws against buying sex don’t stop trafficking, they do make identifying trafficked women harder. The cops say information on possible victims often comes from punters, who are hardly going to go to the police if threatened with arrest. Hookers, health workers and cops also oppose the bill’s attempt to ban brothels; working alone is a lot more dangerous than sharing a receptionist and a maid with other prostitutes.

Such lobbying seems to have done the trick. The amended bill now allows two prostitutes to share premises and take bookings through an agent, while ensuring that men who buy sex from women who sell it willingly will avoid prosecution. It still contains some elements that are unworkable, bordering on idiotic. If a prostitute tells a client she’s a willing seller and later turns out to have been lying, the client can be jailed. But with the efforts of Catherine and her friends some of the remaining silliness may get ironed out. The fact is that people who work in the sex trade are beginning to influence the laws that govern them. Some may think this is no way to run a country, but I’ve yet to see a better idea.

Link: Sexual Politics

Hasty postscript: As I think I've mentioned before there's a powerful (Marxist) argument that the turn away from class-based politics to rights-based politics which has come about as a direct result of neo-liberal economics is (in?)directly responsible for this law (and arguably for the increasing popularity of parties like the BNP). It enables organisations like Eaves to leech off the state (see this thread) by claiming to represent an 'excluded' or 'marginalised' social group without first gaining that group's consent (and indeed in this case in opposition to the wishes of organisations that clearly do represent, or at least have greater legitimacy amongst sex workers). (See David Harvey's Spaces of Global Capitalism: Towards a Theory of Uneven Geographical Development.)

B

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again these campaigns never seem to mention male sex workers which is one of their other many, many flaws. This may be a stupid idea but if there is a campaign to get more men to become sex workers it will make these campaigns weaker. After all bare in mind, these fundamentalist feminists or femnazis think that women are superior to men when the truth is, men and women are equal and can enter any industry on their own free will. It's a shame that the comments on that Guardian article are now closed cause I would love to have commented on what these femnazis really think and how they make up facts and are nothing more then sexist bitches that have hijacked feminism from the sane feminists that support the sex industry even if they are not in it themselves. I hope there will be more groups to counters these anti-sexual freedom groups.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The interesting thing is that if you go back far enough in a lot of these Feminazi Politicians' backgrounds, you find a connection to the NCCL and to their support for the Paedophile Information Exchange.

So the ones trying to make out that Punters are all rapists thought in the past that Kiddy Fiddling was just an expression of sexuality!

The mind boggles.

Maybe I should take a leaf out of their book and make up a statistic that we could then quote as "fact".

How about:

73.7% of the supporters of the current movement to criminalise prostitutes' clients have voted in favour of more rights for paedophiles

Let's see how they like disinformation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the good news is that most of the posts, and the recommendations for posts went against Cath Elliot. Catherine Stephens of the IUSW did a sterling job of winning point after point and a chap called Brucep had a wonderful and irrefutable argument that he couldn't be exploitative when he was a submissive bisexual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I've just posted a comment.

Anybody can vote up/ recommend Max's comment here, no need to register.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

more people should register with the guardian so they can post comments when a puritan article is published

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The interesting thing is that if you go back far enough in a lot of these Feminazi Politicians' backgrounds, you find a connection to the NCCL and to their support for the Paedophile Information Exchange.

Not sure if this is tongue in cheek or not, but am reminder that Hayek, observing 1920s-30s Germany noted that it was easier to turn a communist into a fascist, or vice versa, than to turn a liberal into either. There is a personality trait (or disorder) that seeks expresssion in bossing others about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not sure if this is tongue in cheek or not, but am reminder that Hayek, observing 1920s-30s Germany noted that it was easier to turn a communist into a fascist, or vice versa, than to turn a liberal into either. There is a personality trait (or disorder) that seeks expresssion in bossing others about.

No, check out which senior Labour figures were in NCCL when they had PIE as associate mebers............makes interesting reading.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No, check out which senior Labour figures were in NCCL when they had PIE as associate mebers............makes interesting reading.

It does indeed. Patricia Hewitt was General Secretary and Harriet Harman was legal officer. Perhaps they would claim they were young and inexperienced. Well, they were older than me, and I had no difficulty making the appropriate judgment. In the 6th form and in my first year at university I was a member of the NCCL. I resigned precisely because of these nutters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The interesting thing is that if you go back far enough in a lot of these Feminazi Politicians' backgrounds, you find a connection to the NCCL and to their support for the Paedophile Information Exchange.

That's disgraceful, I hate hypocrisy with a vengeance, I think I'll have to quote that information next time the topic comes up for comment on a news site.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if this is tongue in cheek or not, but am reminder that Hayek, observing 1920s-30s Germany noted that it was easier to turn a communist into a fascist, or vice versa, than to turn a liberal into either. There is a personality trait (or disorder) that seeks expresssion in bossing others about

It's hardly original with Hayek (good though he is). Pascal in the 17th century wrote "Les extremes se touchent" ("extremes meet")

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Elisabeth Pizani also wrote

A parliament of whores? Access denied!

I was keen to go to the meeting in Parliament which Cath mentions. Sadly, I'm unable to assess her contribution to the debate. I got through parliamentary security with a bottle of wine and a cheese knife (!) but couldn't get past the feminist bouncers who were turning away anyone who is interested in actually debating the future of prostitution in this country. Also turned away: colleagues from the World Bank, staff from the offices of MPs supportive of rules that will make sex work safer, and (needless to say) anyone who actually chooses to sell sex for a living

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Elisabeth Pizani also wrote

A parliament of whores? Access denied!

I was keen to go to the meeting in Parliament which Cath mentions. Sadly, I’m unable to assess her contribution to the debate. I got through parliamentary security with a bottle of wine and a cheese knife (!) but couldn’t get past the feminist bouncers who were turning away anyone who is interested in actually debating the future of prostitution in this country. Also turned away: colleagues from the World Bank, staff from the offices of MPs supportive of rules that will make sex work safer, and (needless to say) anyone who actually chooses to sell sex for a living — the people the meeting organisers don’t believe exist.

http://www.wisdomofwhores.com/2009/06/29/a-parliament-of-whores-access-denied/

That shows that the femnazis don't have the guts to take pro-sex feminists and other pro-sex people head on. If only someone could have taken a video camera in and give it to a news organisation and expose them for what they really are, maybe someone can do that in the future.

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