Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Jimmyredcab

London Evening Standard

24 posts in this topic

I realise most of you would not have seen this letter in the Standard as it is now a free newspaper that is only given out in London.

It was written by a woman called Anna van Heeswijk, campaigns coordinator, Object.

No, I have never heard of her either, another busybody woman who thinks she knows more about prostitution than the women who work in the industry.

"In the media circus around the revelation of Belle de Jour's identity, one voice has been conspicuously absent ---- the silent and silenced majority of women in prostitution who do not experience the sex industry as harmless fun.

The issue here is not with Dr Maganti, who had every right to write about her experiences, but with the way one account of prostitution has been used throughout the media to normalise what for the majority constitutes abuse and exploitation.

Such glamourisation grooms women and girls into thinking that selling their bodies is an empowering career choice and tells men and boys that buying women for sexual use is acceptable. We should stop focusing attention on Brooke and ask why this harmful message is being put across in the 21st century."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I realise most of you would not have seen this letter in the Standard as it is now a free newspaper that is only given out in London.

It was written by a woman called Anna van Heeswijk, campaigns coordinator, Object.

No, I have never heard of her either, another busybody woman who thinks she knows more about prostitution than the women who work in the industry.

"In the media circus around the revelation of Belle de Jour's identity, one voice has been conspicuously absent ---- the silent and silenced majority of women in prostitution who do not experience the sex industry as harmless fun.

The issue here is not with Dr Maganti, who had every right to write about her experiences, but with the way one account of prostitution has been used throughout the media to normalise what for the majority constitutes abuse and exploitation.

Such glamourisation grooms women and girls into thinking that selling their bodies is an empowering career choice and tells men and boys that buying women for sexual use is acceptable. We should stop focusing attention on Brooke and ask why this harmful message is being put across in the 21st century."

One would have hoped that in the 21st century, women, with ideas consistent with the Victorian era, would have evolved into modern humans.

Some like this one and Mad Hattie would be an anthropologists delight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I realise most of you would not have seen this letter in the Standard as it is now a free newspaper that is only given out in London.

It was written by a woman called Anna van Heeswijk, campaigns coordinator, Object.

No, I have never heard of her either, another busybody woman who thinks she knows more about prostitution than the women who work in the industry.

"In the media circus around the revelation of Belle de Jour's identity, one voice has been conspicuously absent ---- the silent and silenced majority of women in prostitution who do not experience the sex industry as harmless fun.

The issue here is not with Dr Maganti, who had every right to write about her experiences, but with the way one account of prostitution has been used throughout the media to normalise what for the majority constitutes abuse and exploitation.

Such glamourisation grooms women and girls into thinking that selling their bodies is an empowering career choice and tells men and boys that buying women for sexual use is acceptable. We should stop focusing attention on Brooke and ask why this harmful message is being put across in the 21st century."

Surely, the silent and silenced majority have the perfect opportunity of joining Punternet and telling the world exactly how it is, if they so wish.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely, the silent and silenced majority have the perfect opportunity of joining Punternet and telling the world exactly how it is, if they so wish.

What I would like her to explain is how she regards paying a woman £150 an hour as "abuse and exploitation". :(:confused:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, but in these days there is money to be made by being a loud mouthed anthropological throw back. Here's hoping that changes next year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting that the sisters who claimed to speak for the "silent and silenced majority" are the same sisters who deny and wish to silence the reality of our experiences. Don't we have a voice, too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Don't we have a voice, too?

Yes but you are deluded in thinking that you are doing this as an act of free will.

Well that is their argument so don't have a go at me. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely, the silent and silenced majority have the perfect opportunity of joining Punternet and telling the world exactly how it is, if they so wish.

Ah yes, but this particular majority obviously do not have a computer or do not know how to use the internet! That will be the drugs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jimmy, you ask how "paying a woman £150 an hour as "abuse and exploitation"" - I think she is talking about the women who are trafficked and who are forced into prostitution and who will only see a fraction of that amount.

Yes, they DO exist. It stands to reason that they wont be writing on the board here so we get the story from the other end of the scale where the girls do have a choice. I'm not saying I agree with the 'oh my, how bad is prostitution" brigade but we shouldnt lose sight of the fact that traffiking does occur.

It wont stop my delving into this hobby, as I'm confident that the ladies I see are not trafficked. And while I'm not kidding myself that they are engaging in acts with me for the love of it and that the notes handed over is of inconsequence I know that they can earn the money and move on when they choose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimmy, you ask how "paying a woman £150 an hour as "abuse and exploitation"" - I think she is talking about the women who are trafficked and who are forced into prostitution and who will only see a fraction of that amount.

She never mentioned trafficking in that letter, women like her (and Ms Harman) are against ALL prostitution, whether the lady is willing is irrelevant because they know best. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i wonder if the lady from object is aware that the london evening standard is part of the daily mail group,some titles in the group such as loot has personal ads for massage parlours & escort agencies. or is object too scared to criticise a newspaper group for making money from prostitution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Her own Opinion. Everyone has their own view of the world and society etc and all trying to say that they are right. That's Life. But we will carry one doing what we like as far as everyone involved are happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I realise most of you would not have seen this letter in the Standard as it is now a free newspaper that is only given out in London.

It was written by a woman called Anna van Heeswijk, campaigns coordinator, Object.

No, I have never heard of her either, another busybody woman who thinks she knows more about prostitution than the women who work in the industry.

"In the media circus around the revelation of Belle de Jour's identity, one voice has been conspicuously absent ---- the silent and silenced majority of women in prostitution who do not experience the sex industry as harmless fun.

The issue here is not with Dr Maganti, who had every right to write about her experiences, but with the way one account of prostitution has been used throughout the media to normalise what for the majority constitutes abuse and exploitation.

Such glamourisation grooms women and girls into thinking that selling their bodies is an empowering career choice and tells men and boys that buying women for sexual use is acceptable. We should stop focusing attention on Brooke and ask why this harmful message is being put across in the 21st century."

What crap she talks, the silent minority has been wheeled out on force and vocally. The article of the student who worked on the streets and regretted it and this radio interview.

I heard a radio interview on Thursday (Five Live) with Catherine Stephens and a punter and a street worker called Anna (um same name as the other Anna), who spoke very well and clearly, obviously very intelligent but with a really negative attitude to street work. It pisses me off that minority street workers (sad though the abuse is to them) are brought in to show that prostitution is so harmful. What right have they to a bigger and louder voice than people like Belle, and Catherine and all the others who contribute to this forum.

Oh and worse still a phone in punter from down in Brighton phoned in and he basically said he found someone who he thought might be a coerced. Asked if he did anything, he said no because he did not know her of anyone Eve. Thinking more and more about this, he must have been a plant, because when Anna van Heeswijk started asking him if he had raped her, then she went through her list of lies about most sex workers starting at 14 -15 , he was then contrite and made off stage words from him saying how awful.

God how low do they stoop, I don't belive the BBC were part of this, but I do believe Object are a formidable enemy and will stoop to anything in their propaganda and getting people placed in the correct interviews.

Here is the chat, starts at 10 for about 40 minutes.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00nwv2n

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am always plesed when they break cover, The feminazi. We have got them on the run. This is there desperate attempt before mad Hattie gets kicked out. I am so happy she is going to court ha ha.:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i wonder if the lady from object is aware that the london evening standard is part of the daily mail group

No, it isn't, it was recently bought by a Russian millionaire who turned it into a free newspaper. :(;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Object are a formidable enemy and will stoop to anything in their propaganda and getting people placed in the correct interviews

Funny how they become the front runner as Poppy becomes more and more discredited. Their website describes them as a charity, as do various press quotes, but I cannot find them or their accounts on the Charity Commissioners site. They say also that they get money from the National Lottery, which is yet another good reason for never buying a ticket

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I realise most of you would not have seen this letter in the Standard as it is now a free newspaper that is only given out in London.

It was written by a woman called Anna van Heeswijk, campaigns coordinator, Object.

No, I have never heard of her either, another busybody woman who thinks she knows more about prostitution than the women who work in the industry.

I think you will find more about Object in the following Times article posted today: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/janice_turner/article6926112.ece

[Am in premod still, so someone may post the link before me before this reply goes up.]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jimmy - it doesnt have to be written in plain english. The inference of trafficking is plain to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimmy - it doesnt have to be written in plain english. The inference of trafficking is plain to see.

Disagree.

Ms Harman and her ilk are against all prostitution -------- they would also like to see all lap dancing clubs closed down.

Sex trafficking in the UK is almost non-existent, that is not my opinion, it is a fact. If you think I am wrong I suggest you google "operation pentameter 2", the police raided parlours throughout the country and made a handfull of arrests, a total waste of money. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimmy - it doesnt have to be written in plain english. The inference of trafficking is plain to see.

Inference is what it is. Facts to back up these claims are very thin on the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jimmy - it doesnt have to be written in plain english. The inference of trafficking is plain to see.

There is a darker side to this industry but nothing nearly as bad as is made out and as Jimmy points out the evidence is there to substantiate it. Unfortunately, the blanket prejudices and seemingly personal agenda of Harman and her mob do this cause no favours at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inference is what it is

Jimmy is right, there is no such inference in the letter as quoted. The reference is to prostitution as abusive per se, that is a) because of the evil pimps who are supposedly so numerous and :D because of the transgression by both parties in the act against the sacredness of the human body, whether seen from a humanist or a religious standpoint.

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