Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Inna

The New Prostitutes

10 posts in this topic

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/29/the-new-prostitutes/?emc=eta1&_r=1&

 

 

This article reprises the usual investigations into the entry into sex work and shows how the internet is helping women enter sex work.

However it also notes that there is very little being done to enable these new entrants or any sex working person have the safety and security that is taken for granted by other workers.

If you force people to work in a criminal domain it should be no surprise that they are easy prey for those who dominate those places.

Allowing sex workers to have workers' rights is empowering and enabling.

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"If you force people to work in a criminal domain " ??????????????

 

Aw C'mon Inna ? You usually talk such good sense !

 

Hugs, Hon,  :wub:  :D

Edited by northener44

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"If you force people to work in a criminal domain " ??????????????

 

Aw C'mon Inna ? You usually talk such good sense !

 

Hugs, Hon,  :wub:  :D

 

 

By this I mean if your work and its essential related activities are criminalised then you are located in a criminal domain. If I share a working apartment with another WG that apartment is a brothel and so it becomes a criminal place even if I am not a criminal for working there.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By this I mean if your work and its essential related activities are criminalised then you are located in a criminal domain. If I share a working apartment with another WG that apartment is a brothel and so it becomes a criminal place even if I am not a criminal for working there.  

I understand what you mean Inna. Its either be safe, work in pairs and break the law or stay within the law, work alone and not be as safe. Unless you of course work for an  establishment (criminal domain) and those who hold the power there..am I correct? (or not)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By this I mean if your work and its essential related activities are criminalised then you are located in a criminal domain. If I share a working apartment with another WG that apartment is a brothel and so it becomes a criminal place even if I am not a criminal for working there.  

 

 

I understand what you mean Inna. Its either be safe, work in pairs and break the law or stay within the law, work alone and not be as safe. Unless you of course work for an  establishment (criminal domain) and those who hold the power there..am I correct? (or not)

 

I'm so pleased that you Ladies chose the profession you did ( and hopefully manage to stay within the Law of the Land whilst doing so ) not only because of the pleasure you give "us chaps" by having done so, but also for having not become Barristers ( or have you,  :wacko: ), and given even the most experienced QC a good run for his / her money  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand what you mean Inna. Its either be safe, work in pairs and break the law or stay within the law, work alone and not be as safe. Unless you of course work for an  establishment (criminal domain) and those who hold the power there..am I correct? (or not)

 

Exactly, and what sort of people are willing to rent us apartments so we can work together or who run parlours or brothels etc... people willing to take criminal risks. Now some of these people are actually wonderful, but of course criminal risks require criminal rewards and the idea that a group of women are out-laws and earning good money will also attract criminals who are willing to resort to other criminal practices to control us.

 

This criminalisation through association fosters the idea that some men can treat us violently because rightly or wrongly they imagine they can do so with almost impunity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly, and what sort of people are willing to rent us apartments so we can work together or who run parlours or brothels etc... people willing to take criminal risks. Now some of these people are actually wonderful, but of course criminal risks require criminal rewards and the idea that a group of women are out-laws and earning good money will also attract criminals who are willing to resort to other criminal practices to control us.

 

This criminalisation through association fosters the idea that some men can treat us violently because rightly or wrongly they imagine they can do so with almost impunity. 

How many Escorts actually tell a prospective landlord the precise nature of their business? (Don't get me wrong I'm extremely sympathetic to your point merely observing that in the grand scheme that's well down list of dodgy aspects contributing to this shadow world.)

 

Regarding the 'association' point- that's well taken although even in jurisdictions where selling sex is fully legal/regulated/taxes etc (eg NSW, NZ, Germany..) there will always be violent punters & dangerous psychos. < Again that's not an argument against what you're saying, just saying that legality is only one factor contributing to the source of certain wankers' misogyny.>

 

I read the paper version of the OP article here in States...I'd presumed it would be a recycling of much of the usual BS...but in fairness it's central trust ( even 'educated' Escorts using the net are still at much risk) is well laid out. I recall well when those poor unfortunate girls bodies where found at Gilgo beach- it created quite a stir in US punting circles but sadly not all that much in mainstream american society... the spectics still have much of that puritanical BS flowing in their psyche.

Perhaps a broader peripheral aspect is that a person's chances of being victim to a serial killer are relative (to rest of world) are higher in the US and those targeted ( as seen in this case) are often societies downtrodden. Prohibition has never worked well over here, but I suspect it'll be a very long time before legally/socially the question of legalising Prostitution ever gets a real airing :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many Escorts actually tell a prospective landlord the precise nature of their business? (Don't get me wrong I'm extremely sympathetic to your point merely observing that in the grand scheme that's well down list of dodgy aspects contributing to this shadow world.)

 

Regarding the 'association' point- that's well taken although even in jurisdictions where selling sex is fully legal/regulated/taxes etc (eg NSW, NZ, Germany..) there will always be violent punters & dangerous psychos. < Again that's not an argument against what you're saying, just saying that legality is only one factor contributing to the source of certain wankers' misogyny.>

 

I read the paper version of the OP article here in States...I'd presumed it would be a recycling of much of the usual BS...but in fairness it's central trust ( even 'educated' Escorts using the net are still at much risk) is well laid out. I recall well when those poor unfortunate girls bodies where found at Gilgo beach- it created quite a stir in US punting circles but sadly not all that much in mainstream american society... the spectics still have much of that puritanical BS flowing in their psyche.

Perhaps a broader peripheral aspect is that a person's chances of being victim to a serial killer are relative (to rest of world) are higher in the US and those targeted ( as seen in this case) are often societies downtrodden. Prohibition has never worked well over here, but I suspect it'll be a very long time before legally/socially the question of legalising Prostitution ever gets a real airing :(

 

If we rent an apartment for work and are found out the landlord has to issue summary eviction proceedings against us or risk being prosecuted for running a brothel, this can happen even if we are working alone from home. So we are often dependent on renting from people who will charge us double or more for use of an apartment.

 

Please recommend my comments on Prostitution OP-ED in NYT http://  http://nyti.ms/1b2EIHE http://nyti.ms/1cIS1ek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we rent an apartment for work and are found out the landlord has to issue summary eviction proceedings against us or risk being prosecuted for running a brothel, this can happen even if we are working alone from home. So we are often dependent on renting from people who will charge us double or more for use of an apartment.

 

Please recommend my comments on Prostitution OP-ED in NYT http://  http://nyti.ms/1b2EIHE http://nyti.ms/1cIS1ek

 

Hi Inna- I've  looked through all the article comments & can't see 'yours' ?! Are you based in UK, US or elsewhere?

 

While I follow your point & am genuinely sympathetic, I presume you're aware that even if Prostitution were to become fully regulated/ legal, that there will always be zoning regulations? (In same way you can't generally can't open a hairdressers or newsagents in your flat's front room.)

 

Please don't take this the wrong way: you appear to be focused on aspects <which in context of girls being abducted & ending up buried on a beach> that are truly way down the pecking order of merit within this broader topic. I fully appreciate that everything adds up & proper regulation & fairer legislation may help WGs general circumstances...but the NYTimes piece is about reducing danger, with example of that serial killer,

what has that substantively got to do with housing? (& again I'm really not trying to be a dick, if you're on a broader crusade more power to you!)

Edited by FredDeHead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Inna- I've  looked through all the article comments & can't see 'yours' ?! Are you based in UK, US or elsewhere?

 

While I follow your point & am genuinely sympathetic, I presume you're aware that even if Prostitution were to become fully regulated/ legal, that there will always be zoning regulations? (In same way you can't generally can't open a hairdressers or newsagents in your flat's front room.)

 

Please don't take this the wrong way: you appear to be focused on aspects <which in context of girls being abducted & ending up buried on a beach> that are truly way down the pecking order of merit within this broader topic. I fully appreciate that everything adds up & proper regulation & fairer legislation may help WGs general circumstances...but the NYTimes piece is about reducing danger, with example of that serial killer,

what has that substantively got to do with housing? (& again I'm really not trying to be a dick, if you're on a broader crusade more power to you!)

 

I am uk based try this http://http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/06/29/the-new-prostitutes/?comments#permid=82:1

 

With regards to priorities, rights are indivisible but the point I am making if WGs can legally rent working apartments and work together for safety and security then they would not be so vulnerable to abusive men. 

 

I am not looking for legalisation but decriminalisation and there is a big difference

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