Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
MarcoPolo

Belle's Babes

10 posts in this topic

An expression we might use to cover all the femiwriters who as we speak are lining up to have a go at Dr Magnanti while at the same time trotting out all the usual drivel.

Following Bel (sic) Mooney, here's Tanya "Nutcracker" Gold who has cleverly avoided referencing the discredited Poppycock by hauling out yet another piece of highly suspect research (the name of Melissa Farley is giveaway enough) totally irrelevant to the UK experience:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/17/belle-de-jour-tanya-gold

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.....But a little balance from the Graun. Belinda Webb, the voice of reason, but with bonus class warfare:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/18/prostitution-handwringing-belle-de-jour

My, you are a busy bee, but this is an excellent article - I commend everyone to read it. You see, the Grauniad can air both sides of the argument. :D

Mind you, this bit was, perhaps, a little patronising: "Canny and sustained marketing from blog to book requires a certain level of educated co-operation, as well as a media-savvy articulacy that most sex workers, whether on £30 or £300 an hour, wouldn't know how to exploit." I can certainly think of quite a few on this board who would! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listen in on Thursday to Five Live at 10.00 there should 30 minutes on Belle de Jour and the opportunity to phone in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My, you are a busy bee

Yes, I really must get on with something else.

But the wretched Mail is not going to leave it alone; nothing so furious as a tabloid scorned. Where did they get this one from? Must have had her up their sleeve for some time:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1229098/I-student-girl-like-Belle-Jour--shame-leave-me.html

"A student call girl like Belle de Jour"? Hardly, she chose to be a streetwalker FFS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Gold article has spawned an enormously number of comments, and most of you will have better things to do with your time than trawl through them. To summarise, they're overwhelmingly in our favour once again.

Here are two which caught my eye, which are worth passing on. The first is on the fake statistics:

"How to do fake statistics, lesson one:

Suppose you don't like marriage. Do a structured survey in a battered wives' refuge. The bias to negative experience is likely, and will support your preconception

Suppose you hate sport and wish to show it is harmful. Do a structured survey in a sports injuries or spinal rehabilitation unit. Sport is very harmful, rugby especially.

Suppose you have moral objection to prostitution and wish to provide evidence to support yopur prejudice. (i) interview streetwalkers only; they, poor girls, are the bottom of the heap, often too disorganised to be employable by any massage parlour or escort agency (ii) choose hell-hole countries, (iii) include women in refuges and in prisons (iv) find a study that says the average age for entry of American street children into prostitution is 12-14 and then cross out the words 'American street children.

Always publish in second rate journals or (as with Poppy Project) without peer review but make sure you push out a press release."

The writer also adds a link to an article on fake methodology in prostitution studies:

http://www.woodhullfoundation.org/content/otherpublications/WeitzerVAW-1.pdf

And of the various ladies who sent in their experiences, this one was particularly eloquent:

"gab08: Of course you have a right to disagree, but so do I. I think it is a tragedy of modern times that ignorant women like you cannot acknowledge that there are women like ME, Belle du Jour and SO many others who believe that it is not only okay to provide sexual fulfillment of a stranger, but that it can even be a good job.

The ignorance is yours, not ours, that you cannot look beyond your little world where everyone can find an appropriate partner for love and sex, to the world of reality where there are so many lonely individuals who yearn for some sort of companionship and are willing to risk the scorn of individuals like you in order to have someone to be with for however much time.

And for the other ignorant folks who claim that Belle du Jour is a fake, well, only if the thousands of others of us current and former sex workers are also fake!

Most of us cannot "come out" because we are punished by society if we do- unless of course we bow down to the radical feminists and religious conservatives and agree that we are victims... then we are offered government money to show others the error of our ways! Such utter hypocrisy!

Indeed there is much flawed research on prostitution- because as Prof. Weitzer points out- those who conduct this so called research are biased from the beginning and will find whatever 'statistics' satisfy their cherished beliefs. Those of us who have seen how these people do their research know only too well that they are never going to be honest in either their methodology or their presentation.

They will not debate us- they know that they have no rational, valid arguments for making or keeping consenting adult commercial sex a crime- only subjective emotional claptrap that those who already think the worst of prostitution are going to readily accept and agree with.

Those of us who favor decriminalization of all private, consenting adult prostitution do not claim that there are no victims or persons who are trafficked... anymore than I could, as a happy housewife. claim that there are no victims of domestic violence and spousal abuse. It would be absurd. But it is more absurd for those who claim that criminalizing either prostitutes or all of their clients is somehow going to relieve the situation by "lessening the demand."

The "demand" will only be lessened when there are no more human beings who get lonely, who are widowed, divorced, socially inept, physically disabled, or have fantasies which they cannot risk having exposed during divorce proceedings or to a board of directors. And NO, that doesn't mean dangerous fantasies or rape or any of the other outlandish claims that some posters make.

And women like me will always make ourselves available to such clients even at the risk of being arrested, because we believe we have a right to do with our body whatever we like and because we have no moral qualms about giving pleasure to others for money.

The venom and bile spewed at women like me shows that it is not out of a deep concern for our well being that so many of you claim to have. Nor is your concern consistent for women who may be employed in "dangerous" professions, because none of you demand the criminalization of professions that are equally if not more 'dangerous' than selling something we can legally give away. Nor do I read here or anywhere else that anyone thinks that marriage should be abolished to protect women from domestic violence and spousal abuse...

You claim to care about us, worry over our "mental and physical well being" but yet you ignore the decades of evidence of police corruption involving prostitutes. You ignore the damage done to us by those who are supposed to protect us. When a prostitute in Los Angeles was raped, the judge who presided at the trial of the rapist- the judge- once an LAPD officer- said that prostitutes cannot be raped! You leave us in the hands of men who are just as eager to sample our wares as the clients who pay us- but for these officers, we can exchange sex, money and information and can continue to work without being arrested.

Some claim police need laws against prostitution so that they can ferret out victims of trafficking and coercion... are the police so incompetent that they cannot tell the difference? Would you put them in charge of rape cases if they could not tell the difference between a victim of rape and a woman who had consensual sex with a man (or another woman)?

What about the children? We must protect them! And so we must- but not one child is saved by arresting adult prostitutes. The resources that could be used to go after those who hire or employ underage persons are squandered by arresting adults who have nothing to do with children.

Gab08 says "imagine a world free of the grim reality of of people bought and sold like detergent on a shelf"... I imagine a world where I can truly say, "My Body, My Choice!!!!!!"

There was also much sterling work from Catherine Stephens. Very impressive, all of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's all over bar the shouting, of which there still seems to be rather a lot because of the Belle story. Might have helped if she'd come out a few months ago and the battleground for debate could have shifted to what proportion truly are exploited. Not sure it would have made much difference as the legislators minds were closed to facts and reason.

Now it's about the implementation. How it plays out from place to place, and where first.

We're well placed here on Punternet to get early warning of developments happening nationally or in our own areas. Just have to keep abreast of things as it were.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see Alison Pearson has been mentioned in this area. Guess what the first WG I was ever with was an Alison Pearson lookalike and she was quite moody and that's no joke! Anybody else out there been with eg a Harriet Harmon lookalike or maybe a Jacqui Smith and how was it? I don't like fake socialists by the way!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Today's instalment comes from the Torygraph and from one Liz Hunt (who she?):[/QUOTE]

By the looks of it she has to be Mike's sister.:o

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0