In any discussion that takes place these days about prostitution and other forms of sex work it’s virtually guaranteed that at some point in the debate either the English Collective of Prostitutes (ECP) or the International Union of Sex Workers (IUSW), or indeed both, will be cited by someone as being the authentic voice of those working in the industry.
Whenever those of us who are opposed to legalisation or across the board decriminalisation air our views, we’re invariably shouted down and accused of not listening to what prostitutes themselves want: “Go and talk to the IUSW” we’re told: “they represent prostitutes: they know what they’re talking about.”
The IUSW in particular seems to be working hard just lately to raise its profile, and has managed to garner support from Feminist Fightback among others. But then, as the IUSW is a recognised branch of the GMB, one of Britain’s biggest trade unions, it’s not hard to see why a left-wing, rights-orientated group like Feminist Fightback would be drawn to them. After all, there’s no doubt that women working in prostitution suffer some of the worst abuses and are some of the most vulnerable women in society, so if there’s a trade union group out there that can offer them support and representation, then what could be wrong with that?
In theory of course there’s nothing wrong with it, but as this discussion over at the F Word showed recently, the reality is somewhat different. If, as feminists have been claiming for years, the IUSW are not the authentic voice of prostituted women, nor indeed the voice of those working in the industry, who exactly are they?
Let’s look at the evidence.
Douglas Fox, who posted comments on the F Word thread, and who signed himself off as “D Fox sex worker and IUSW activist” is the founder of and a business -partner in, one of the country’s biggest escort agencies, Christony Companions. The agency was set up by Fox in 1999 in the Newcastle Upon Tyne area, and has now apparently established itself as “the market leader in the North East.” Fox and his business partner John Dockerty also run agencies in Edinburgh, York and Carlisle, and have plans to expand into Leeds and West Yorkshire; they’ve also “franchised the name into Essex and Surrey with other areas coming soon.”
But while all this expansion and promotion of the company “brand” has been going on, Douglas Fox has also been busy setting himself up as a IUSW activist: he’s drawn up template letters for the pro-prostitution lobby to sign in opposition to the government’s latest prostitution proposals; he’s put his name about all over the net as a representative of sex workers and their rights, and he’s generally done whatever he can to ensure that he’s being recognised and cited as an authentic voice in the prostitution debate, and a spokesperson for disenfranchised prostituted men and women everywhere.
Are we seriously supposed to believe that a man who makes his living managing escorts is more interested in securing them their rights than he is in his own profit margins?
In a discussion forum on the Christony Companions website, Fox recently put out a plea for funding for a new, campaigning arm of the IUSW GMB branch:
“We need money to campaign however so if you do not want to join the union but can donate to the IUSW campaign then please do. I will keep everyone informed when the changes are finally agreed but if we can have some sugar daddies and mummies and agencies prepared to donate monthly funds then boy do we need them.”
That’s right, a plea for punters and other escort agencies to help fund a branch of the GMB that was set up to provide union representation for those employed in the sex trade.
And it gets worse. In another recent discussion forum, this time over at Punterlink International, a contributor named Elrond posted this suggestion when discussing threats to the sex industry:
“I would again suggest all write and complain to your MP. You all should either donate and join the IUSW as an escort or a friend if you are a punter.“
And it’s as simple as that.
If you look at the GMB IUSW membership application form it’s easy to see how anyone claiming to be an escort or claiming to work in any area of the sex industry can take up membership. Confidentiality is obviously at a premium when signing workers up from such a sensitive industry, but as the comment on Punterlink shows, this also means that membership of IUSW branch is open to abuse: anyone can join.
As indeed they have been doing.
The IUSW has lost any credibility it may have had in the prostitution debate, populated as it is with pimps, agency owners, and punters. Furthermore, no trade union can represent the interests of both workers and employers at the same time, and by appointing themselves as spokespeople for the women they employ, Douglas Fox and others like him are going against the basic principles of trade unionism itself.
To quote one of the comments on the F Word thread:
“A union that invites and accepts pimps and punters into its membership to inflate the figures, decide its direction, be its spokespeople, and then influence law and policy, that is a corrupt union and I dont give a shit what anyone else tries to sell it as – its time people recognised whats going on here.”
The GMB clearly needs to have a rethink about both the running of and the membership of its IUSW branch. And Feminist Fightback and others need to look more closely as those they have chosen to align themselves with.
Too Much To Say For Myself 
As someone who’s been much more involved in trade union movements, Cath, I’d be interested to know what you think about *any kind* of employers/business owners joining a union? Let alone in an ‘industry’ like this…
Basically they shouldn’t be doing it Jess.
Trade unions are there to provide a means by which employees can organise collectively to negotiate pay/terms and conditions etc with the employer. A business owner doesn’t have an employment contract with him/herself, or indeed anyone but themselves to negotiate their working conditions with, and as they’re the one the employees have to bargain with, their presence in the union is a complete conflict of interests.
Business owners etc can join trade associations if they want a means by which to protect/lobby for their interests, like the Lap Dancing Association for example, or the CBI.
I have been following the ‘debate’ on the F word. Most enlightening. I’d have more respect for these organisations if their representatives were honest about what and who they are.
These people don’t seem to understand the basics of trade unionism. Which is about workers organising collectively to ensure they can effectively ensure their interests are represented. Against exploitation by employers. (sorry just repeating what you’ve said, Cath, but it bears repeating).
Douglas Fox keeps the bit about him running an escort agency pretty quiet. I found one of his CiF pieces by googling him and he blahs on about ‘choice’ being extercised by sex workers (not explaining really why the huge majority of those exercising this choice are women) and how they need pimps to protect them. He doesn’t mention at all that he is one of these kindly protectors.
If IUSW and ECP are so bothered about ‘sex workers rights’ why don’t they encourage sex workers to set up independent collectives where they can keep all the money they earn? And they wouldn’t be breaking the law that way either.
Trade unions are there to provide a means by which employees can organise collectively to negotiate pay/terms and conditions etc with the employer.
[…]
Business owners etc can join trade associations if they want a means by which to protect/lobby for their interests
That’s totally it Cath. No employer (or indeed ‘client’/punter) should be in a WORKER’S UNION, they should be in trade associations or lobby groups. The fact that pimps and punters have infiltrated workers’ unions, and by the sounds of it, dramatically so, completely discredits the union, and more importantly, endangers the voice/representation of the actual ‘workers’.
If we ever suspected that pimps and punters were a dishonest lot, in it for their own gain … this is the proof.
Cath – that’s what I thought. I am surprised that he would even qualify for membership, on that basis…
Also the idea of punters joining the union would be like me joining Usdaw because I buy things in shops. Except slightly less savoury. But as Cath points out, anyone can join IUSW. Might join myself… What do you reckon the subs are?
PS those IUSW membership conditions in full.
If you consider yourself to be working in the sex industry, you can join regardless of immigration or taxation status – whether you work for an escort agency, in a massage parlour, a private flat, on the street, a shop selling adult videos, behind or in front of the camera making adult entertainment, a strip club or from home doing phone sex.
You must live in UK but your nationality or immigration status does not matter. You do not need to provide proof of identity and can join using your professional name. Members are entitled to attend Branch meetings and to stand or vote in elections of officers at Branch and national level.
We also welcome applications for membership from allies, supporters and friends of sex workers.
It’s really ridiculous. I’m tempted to see if any of my mates want to join the NUJ, on the basis that they’re friends with a journalist!
It costs £5.98 a month. So maybe not.
But just think what you get for the money Polly. £5.98 a month buys you influence and you never know, you could turn up to a meeting and get voted in as a branch officer!
And to whoever that was that got caught in my spam queue. Don’t even think about trying to advertise that shite on my blog.
“But just think what you get for the money Polly. £5.98 a month buys you influence and you never know, you could turn up to a meeting and get voted in as a branch officer!”
Of course, Fox’s guarding the hen house…literally in this case.
I do wish for your first foray into freelancing outside CiF Cath, you’d write this up as a mainstream meeja article. It would stop this bunch ever being taken seriously or used as rent a quotes by the meeja ever again. And the GMB might realise they look a bit daft currently too.
Well in a bid for free membership – as somebody with experience of employment law, I could be invaluable to the IUSW. I could help their members take themselves to employment tribunals. No wait….
I wish exposure of the truth would discredit pimps and other rape profiteers, but when the history of the short-lived group COYOTE was written it was found that in 1981 only 3% of its members were prostitutes and COYOTE never provided any actual services like drug rehab, housing assistance, or exit assistance to any prostitutes. The biographer concluded that the image of COYOTE as a union for prostitutes was intentionally spun to appeal to the media, and COYOTE hasn’t been active in their pro-prostitution lobbying goals for many years but they still get listed by liberals as noble humanitarians for women’s liberation.
Men may want prostituted women, but liberal women need prostituted women to make money as writers and evade the punishments doled out to people who work to deny men the right to get away with rape because they paid money. I can’t think of why else pimps like Douglas Fox are allowed free reign to lie and push their sexually exploitive capitalism with the assistance of unions, newspapers, and blogs normally considered to be working for progressive causes.
Excellent Work!
Yes indeed these facts concerning IUSW need a wider readership because IUSW and ECP are now apparently the ‘voices of prostituted women.’ So how come Johns, pimps, brothel owners one and all are and can be be members of IUSW. Do all these individuals actually perform sexual services for the male buyers? Do the aforementioned really engage in the day to day routine work of making their bodies available for Johns to masturbate into. Of course not but who cares as long as IUSW can claim ‘we are the voice of prostituted women.’ Coyote was discredited and it is high time IUSW and ECP were also discredited.
Ah but I am forgetting one important thing – IUSW promotes that mythical idea ‘free choice.’ The idea majority of prostituted women are ‘choosing to enter prostitution’ and so this negates any male violence inflicted on the women.
So are GMB being fooled because the evidence clearly points that way. I always thought unions were created for workers not bosses and owners but now that is so passe – now anyone can join – worker or boss! Reminds me of The Emperor’s Clothes – you can fool people most of the time but sometimes a dissenter appears.
Catherine Stephens of the IUSW is a pimp. So sue me.
Julie, you should’t feel the need to sugarcoat your assessment …
😛
Douglas Fox, besides being involved in Christony, is also a highly active supporter of Amnesty International and AVAAZ and a very articulate advocate of sex workers’ rights and safety.
Just as in the prohoibitionist movement, many of the same people are to be found together operating under different banners from time to time, the IUSW and the London adult workers’ branch of the GMB are in actuality different bodies. To have employers present in a union, in any event, would not be unique to the GMB – the NUJ, for example, has many freelance members who employ journalists and other staff, and special rules when a conflict of interest arises.
It seems Julie Bindel and the rest of you get very upset when ‘pimps’ and other sexworkers fail to live up to your stereotypical ideals as ruthless exploitative thugs and hapless, inarticulate drug-addicts. If you ever grow out of the Guardian I suggest you progress to the Beano.
The IUSW has never claimed to be the voice of ‘prostituted women’. We are, however, a voice of sex workers in the United Kingdom – female, male and transgender. The IUSW and GMB union have never objectified those in the sex industry in the way many of you commenting seem to feel comfortable doing by describing us as objects to which things are done rather than having agency over our own lives and bodies.
Excuse me but arent the IUSW campaigning against the proposed changes in law by claiming to represent the prostitutes themselves? Arent representatives of the IUSW sending missives all over the place asking for pimp and punter alike to send money to the IUSW and to contact their MPs to campaign against the legislation?
The IUSW claims to be – and is – a voice of sex workers, just as Ruth says. And sure it’s campaigning against the legislation. And it’s not alone in campaigning against the legislation, unsurprisingly, since sex crime in Sweden has leaped 40% since it criminalised punters. Check out:
http://stephenpaterson.wordpress.com/
I’ve read a few of the comments above about the IUSW GMB sex work branch. To be honest much in obviously factually incorrect and polerised in it’s views to the point of being missleading in a way that must be known to those writing such inflamatory statments. I appreciate that sex work isn’t work that all those who are writing like, even acknowlage as such, but all of us on both sides of the debate and campagne for legal change, should keep it to that a debate. To make such personal comments about others just goes to drive us all apart and doen’t aid those we are all seeking to serve in the sex industry. I can say from knowing those in the GMB IUSW branch that they work very hard, for little thanks and certainly no financial reward as I’m sure many do who feel equally passionatly but hold an alternative view. I should point out that non of us are paid for the articles we write and do at least enjoy the support of working sex workers.
Unsurprisingly, since sex crime has leaped 40% in Sweden since it criminalised punters? Well surprise surprise, maybe some of the punters didn’t take the new law too seriously, and now, due to resources being put into enforcing the new law, they are being caught, therefore adding to the sex crime statistics. Genius!
stephenpaterson
No, the IUSW is a voice for sex workers, because yet again they’re being denied any voice of their own.
Strange, I don’t see anything there that says
Errr…no, Charlie D. Rape in Sweden rose 13% in the last full year on record alone.
I want to be clear stephen – are you saying that without access to prostitutes men are forced to commit more rapes?
Are you asking us to accept the abuse of some women within prostitution in order to protect our own skins? Are you saying our priority should be to keep rapists sweet by offering them a supply of women at affordable prices?
Thats what it sounds like. I just want to be sure im not misunderstanding you.
Do you work in the sex industry Chris Student?
If the GMB supports women in the sex industry then why is it so consistently opposed to legislation that would limit the growth of this misogynistic and sexually exploitative industry and help victims within the industry, whilst holding those responsible for their abuse (pimps and johns) accountable?
If you think that Cath’s blog post is factually inaccurate why don’t you point out which parts are incorrect and supply us with corrections?
I am merely pointing out that since Sweden criminalised clients, their stats for rape, sexual molestation and sexual coercion have risen 40 per cent and, over the last year, their rate for rape has risen 13 per cent.
Now, of course, this may have nothing whatsoever to do with criminalising punters. But there again it may. I think it would probably be inaccurate to associate all the rise with the criminalisation. But there again, I think it would be naive to think that no cases of rape have resulted.
In any event, it is clearly something that people in general and decision takers and opinion formers should be aware of in the debate on the proposed legislation.
Rape rose by 13% in Sweden? Is that because the (now recognised) rape of trafficked, prostituted etc women is included in these statistics perhaps.
If men who use prostituted women are driven to rape when they can’t find a woman’s body to use then they should be in prison, not being supported in paying for sex with some of the most vulnerable and abused in our society.
Mind you there have been a number of prostituted women who have described it as like being paid to be raped.
It is widely accepted that rates of rape report, nevermind convictions, are low and affect statistics of actual rape. Perhaps now that Sweden is sending out a clear message that all women are human, women feel emanicipated to report their rapes more frequently as they have a new outlook and greater hope.
it would make sense for reports of sexual violence to rise if a government takes steps to show that it will take those reports seriously.
it seems to me that stephen is basically saying that many punters are sexually violent men anyway, and that the best way to deal with this is to ignore it by letting them pay their victims.
i cant see any other way to read his posts.
Stephenpaterson – “Now, of course, this may have nothing whatsoever to do with criminalising punters. But there again it may”
No stephen that will be to do with men choosing to rape. So we need to adapt our laws to introduce a cathartic outlet for men to stop raping, is this what you are saying? If you are then isn’t this rather derogatory towards men.
Susan Brownmiller. Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape
Everyone seems to be trying to rationalise a very inconvenient fact here. As far as the National Crime Prevention people in Sweden can tell, their sex crime figures – not just reports – they quite clearly state a probable increase in actual criminality – have gone up 40%, with a 13% rape increase in the last recorded year.
That’s the ball, so stop playing the man.
I do not believe in stereotyping sex workers as victims or punters as violent or indirect sex workers/pimps as exploiters. I’ve grown out of Vixtorian melodramas a long time ago.
And if we’re talking of the 255 trafficking victims discovered by Pentameter – the quarter of one percent of the estimated 80,000-strong prostitute population – let us ask what their chances of discovery would be in the years between the police raids if not for the integrity of some of these ‘violent abusers’ you call punters.
Check out
In any discussion I am involved in for the IUSW I use my real name. I am therefore very easy to find . If I was in anyway ashamed of being a sex worker I could easily hide my identity. I am however very proud of being a gay male sex worker for ten years and also in my civil partner who runs a N East escort agency representing women and sometimes men who employ him to do a specific job as an agent. If some persons did their research correctly they would know that we are not a nationwide agency nor do we have franchise elsewhere. Nor are we sadly millionaires.
As a sex worker and with a partner employed by self employed escorts to represent them I am I believe in a better position to talk about the adult industry than many on here. Some commentators find it far easier to deal in caricature than to acknowledge real people. The fact that real people do a real job of their choosing is obviously anathema to people who prefer to talk of caricatured victims and abusers.
I expect the abuse from some quarters because I choose to be public but it is insulting to the escorts represented by my partner that their self agency should be questioned and their choices dismissed and abused. It is insulting that genuinely trafficked or abused victims are used with total disregard to their genuine circumstances to support state sponsored persecution of women and men by the use of bad law.
Only the recognition and acceptance of voices and choices that may differ from yours will result in the recognition of human rights and it is only the recognition of human rights that will ever stop abuses in this industry or any other.
Those who cry rape in relation to sex work are choosing to ignore the voices of women and men and trangender persons who work in this industry and they are endangering those who through various circumstance are involved in this work unwillingly.
The IUSW represents every sex worker regardless of the position they have in the industry and we are active in protecting and promoting human rights for all and making the industry safe for sex workers. We support exit strategies for those who wish to leave and support fully any trafficked victim. We do this as a human rights based organisation.
The IUSW is entitled to inform and to ask for donations from those who work in and who support human rights of sex workers.
Douglas Fox ( IUSW and Amnesty International activist)
I find it appalling that an organization claiming to organize and represent the interests of prostitutes should have an entrepreneur running an escort agency as a spokesperson, but equally appalling that this is not seen as problematic by the GMB.
All unions are desperate to recruit new members but has the GMB dropped its standards completely? Trade unions require a certificate of independence from the Government Certification Officer – a requirement designed to ensure they are distinguished from employer-sponsored staff associations which historically have done the employers bidding whilst presenting themselves as organizations looking after employees’ interests. The GMB is putting this at risk.
Imagine a trade union campaigning against the minimum wage through fear that jobs and therefore membership numbers might reduce as a result, then enlisting sweatshop employers to support their common interest.
Disgraceful and not much different.
racaille I have to remind you that I am a self employed sex worker and my partner is employed by self employed escorts who freely choose him to represent them.
Also managements and workers are welcome in many unions.
This is yet more misinformation from those who object to sex workers having a voice.
Douglas
Douglas
If you read the piece properly you’d see that nowhere does it say you’re a nationwide agency; it also says you’ve franchised the name, not set up franchises – if you clicked the links you’d also see that all that information is taken from a statement issued by yourselves.
Douglas
This is the bit that always intrigues me, so perhaps you could explain. If your agency is employed by these women, and not vice-versa, then how come your agency is able to advertise vacancies and draw up job descriptions?
http://www.sundaysun.co.uk/news/north-east-news/2004/10/31/job-satisfaction-79310-14821488/
Douglas
But business owners are not.
And I’ll repeat what I said on the F Word thread, this has nothing to do with not wanting sex workers to have a voice, this is about objecting strongly to the fact that their voice has been appropriated by you and others of your ilk.
douglas – your escort agencys website says right there on the front page that it is a member of the IUSW.
how can an agency itself be a member of workers union?
do you require all your staff to be members?
Cath Elliot.
The statement you quote was made shortly after a documentary that meant enquires were made by numerous persons. Nothing came of it.
The persons represented by my partner are self employed. You can advertise self employed positions. Again it is from an old article.
I am a sex worker and my voice is as relevant as any other sex workers voice. If you choose not to accept my voice that is your choice.
V Everyone has a choice to join the union if they wish. We are not a closed shop. The agency supports rights and free choice and therefore supports the IUSW.
Douglas fox.
ewww, the pimps and johns have arrived.
stephenwankerson, pull your head in – wtf do you actually know about rape anyway? Except maybe as a perp. Reported rapes are but the tip of the iceberg, and also the cycle of reports increases/decreases depending on the (legal & social) climate for the victims. Just cuz they don’t report it, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. So any increase in reporting has to be looked at compared to the legal/social climate at the time. Just for the record, I don’t support paid rapes, because apparently rapists will rape ‘innocent women’ if they don’t get to rape a paid hooker (90% of whom want to exit ‘the business’). You dudes don’t seem to get that rape, to any woman/child, is WRONG, do you? Money or no money. Having a dick does not mean you are entitled to stick it into any other living creature without their fully informed and free consent. And free consent also includes an economic climate whereby women and children are not forced into prostitution because that is the only way they can survive.
Fox: well, you are just pure sleeze — you cannot even see a conflict of interest when pimps and johns get to influence policy for ‘sex workers’ (the majority of whom are female, and I’ll bet that that majority is NOT represented by proportion in the IUSW). Either you are far out of touch with reality, or you are completely self-centred. Take your pick, neither is pretty.
v
I think he’d like them to be, but from the comment he made on one of the forums on the agency website it sounds like they’re not all as appreciative of the IUSW as he’d like them to be:
Douglas So are the women who staff the sex phone chat lines the agency runs also self-employed?
We know the women you sell to punters are self-employed Douglas. It’s another of the reasons why it’s such a joke to pretend that a union is any use to them. Trade unions’ main reason for existence is to provide the means of collective bargaining for workers. Your workers have nothing to negotiate with because you have passed on the risks of their employment to them by making them self-employed. It’s classic workplace abuse by a bad employer.
What you are doing is infiltrating the GMB to use it as a platform to promote the interests of the sex industry, not the workers, and using union membership as some kind of spurious marketing gimmick for your agency.
It’s worth noting that escort agencies are virtually the only employer who would ever use trade union membership of their workers as a way of promoting their business. It just goes to show that so-called unionisation in the sex industry (which is generally anything but because as I said there are few or no opportunities for collective bargaining) is just a means of gaining legitimacy for your misogynistic enterprises.
FOX should speak for Pimps not sex workers, as should all men and women who offer sex workers for sale. Nor should they, as employers, be admitted to any worker organizations even if they also prostitute their own bodies occasionally. They have a clear conflict of interest. I urge the feminists on this blog to work to change the union laws in England to prohibit employers from being any part of worker unions.
FOX is openly identified as a pimp making an income from exploiting sex workers. He and all brothel, escort and pimps owner/employers should be required by union law to open the account books showing how income is distributed including expenses so that every dollar is accounted for including that spent for advertising which I am sure pays for many of the comments on this and other blogs. I am sure your taxing agencies will assist you in passing such laws.
You are perfectly correct Douglas Fox – management and workers are welcomed in many unions.
Indeed, German trade unions organize vertically industry by industry. What managers and workers have in common in those situations is that they share an employment relationship with an employer in the course of which their union negotiates their pay and conditions . As employees and union members they have certain statutory rights as well.
You aren’t an employee – you are a self-employed contractor. Fine, start a trade association, a marketing campaign or some other industry body if you wish but don’t make out you are a trade unionist or carry out the functions of a trade union when you don’t.
I can see why a livelihood as an agent for prostitutes means having an interest in resisting the reduced customer numbers that proposed legislation may bring- much in the same way that peace initiatives are not always popular with arms manufacturers. However, arms manufacturers by and large don’t make out that they have the interests of the ordinary sapper at heart.
Stormy, I regard that last remark of yours as grossly abusive. Just for the record I am not and have never been a sex worker, nor have I ever employed the services of one, nor have I nor do I have any financial interest in the sex industry.
Nor am I a rapist. Difficult though you may find it to believe, not all men are.
I am, however, very interested in the plights of minorities, especially sex workers and migrants. Come to think of it, as there are more women than men in the UK, minorities also include men. So stick that down your Harriet Harman.
It was exactly a year ago that David Aaronovitch, writing about Harman’s views on prostitution in the Times (which, of course, ran similarly to the current proposals) asked “By the way, Harriet, what happens to this demand once you’ve tackled it?”
Well, now we’ve got the Swedish sex crime stats we may count ourselves closer to knowing the answer.
Hold on a minute. The law criminalising the buying of sex in Sweden was passed in 1999. In England and Wales, the number of reported rapes (according to the British Crime Survey) was 7,132, and in 2007 (the most recent I have figures for) was 12,630. This works out at an increase of about 77%. If the increase in reported rapes in Sweden over roughly the same period is only 40%, then they are doing rather well. The increase of 13% over the last year cant have anything to do with the law on prostitution as it hasnt changed. With the huge increase in pornography consumption that has occurred globally over this period as a result of its ready availibility on the internet, we would expect the incidence of sexual violence to rise, so perhaps the criminalization of buying sex in Sweden has actually helped to keep the rape statistics a lot lower than they might otherwise have been.
wankerson, my comment was rude, but not abusive. You dudes just have no idea what real abuse is, thereby claiming to be abused whenever some female dares not kiss your beloved ass.
Now, get fucking serious – with YOURSELF. If you are ‘interested’ (hey dude, wtf don’t you CARE, not just be interested, detatched lipservice dude?) in the plight of ‘minorities’ – whilst that sounds all good and fuzzy warm, you should be actively on the side of trafficked women and children, not on the side of the johns. And there are lots of ways you could help ‘minorities’, other than supporting the men who rape them. If you were genuinely ‘interested’ (cared???!!) you would be demanding stronger laws than the ones proposed now.
Waste of fucking oxygen you are.
Escorting and sex work can be a lonely business without contact with other colleagues. The forums give an element of bonding to those who contribute and read these forums, both sex workers and clients. Our forums are open and available for anyone to read. We have NOTHING to hide other than our real names. I used the forums as a concerned person to highlight the need for funds.
I posted on Punterlink to hilight the crap what was being piled on the sex industry. Unlike the abolitionists who have the support of the Government and the funding from the Government, the ECP and IUSW get nothing. The IUSW end ECP require the funds to compete with the dangerous propaganda and lies being propagated by the abolitionists.
Support from both escorts and clients is a way to raise money to fight this insidious legislation. Yes I wish all escorts joined the IUSW, but I go back to statement that this is a lonely job often with little contact between other sex workers, and often with the ill founded belief that nothing in legislation will effect sex workers. There are even those independent escorts who believe what they do is illegal, and punters who also belive buying sex is illegal.
The GMB application form specifically asks how members are involved in the industry. Despite the confidentiality of the form, you do in the end give up your real name and bank details.
That was a cheap shot from Julie Brindel about Catherine “Stephens of the IUSW is a pimp. So sue me.” Reminds me of some comments about AnotherEscort.
Oh, and whilst I am in the ranty mood:
Fox – FFS, stop calling these women ‘girls’. I have seen some of your comments over at the F-Word, and you consistently call these women ‘girls’. They are NOT girls, unless you are running some kind of paedophillia ring. When they hit 18, and assuming that your ‘sex worker’ representation is over the age of 18, then they are ‘women’ or ‘young women’. If they are younger than that, then sure, they are girls — and I’m calling the cops.
Hey Elrond — you are describing a support group, not a union.
Support group = emotional support
Union = workers uniting to get fair pay and conditions from an employer.
As other commenters have pointed out, a bit pointless for the self employed.
Sadly it seems that anyone who speaks for human rights and especially the rights of sex workers is dismissed by some who choose happily to ignore individual human dignity. Recognising personal agency would diminish the power of the caricature and the message that women are victims of male violence.
Nothing any sex worker will say will be accepted because this thread is not about rights or about trafficking or about abused women or about my partner being an agent but rather it is about an ideological rant that uses the caricatured victim quite shamelessly to push an agenda.
It is an agenda that endangers and hurts women and men and transgender sex workers. I of course will be torn to pieces for saying this and the rant will be that the IUSW is a pimp organisation and I am a pimp etc etc. But until our voices as sex workers are heard and our rights are recognised than lives will be destroyed and people will die. Only rights ever defeat wrongs. History has prove this over and over again not that few on this thread will admit that sadly.
Douglas ( a proud member of the IUSW and activist for Amnesty and a very happy hooker)
I totally agree a Union in most cases represents an employee in an employee/employer relationship. That hopefully will be the long term outcome in the sex industry.
This relationship though does stop employees (self employed contractors) and employers combining together to fight bad legislation being proposed by NuLabour.
fox – you do realize that many feminists and radical feminists have personal experience of the sex trade – non?
So, very often you are preaching to the de-mobbed choir?
just asking.
Elrond, do you work in the industry or are you a customer?
You know I remember in the TV programme about your disgusting agency, Douglas, where they filmed one of your punters having a “girlfriend experience” with one of the women you sell. It seemed to consist of having dinner with her (although he made her pay for her own food) and talking warmly about the anal sex he was planning on doing to her later in the evening.
It actually makes me feel quite sick reading you talking about human dignity when you are so far from understanding it that it’s not even funny. One of these days you’ll wake up and realise what making money from selling women for anal sex means and what sort of person that makes you. If what you were doing wasn’t so destructive I’d almost pity your delusions.
h2281n, you make a very good point in relation to our rape figures, which I hadn’t checked. BUT your 2007 figure (which presumably is for 2005-6) was the peak. While the Swedish rape figures have shot up 13% in the last recorded year, our have declined by 8% in the case of rape of a female, in fact there’s been two years’ figures since then and they have declined by 13% in those two years.
Click to access hosb0708.pdf
Recent rape of a male figures are also down.
Stormy, how the hell do you know whether I know what abuse is? For all you know I may have survived the holocaust or just arrived home from Guantanamo.
Douglas Your agency gives women away as prizes in a monthly competition on your web forum, so do us all a favour and don’t try and lecture us about human dignity.
Both.
I am a customer, and I provide free advertising on the Internet for escorts. Before you say it, I don’t do this for freebies. Infact 80% of women I meet don’t advertise on my site, and those I do meet who do advertise it is still purely at their rates.
From the advertising side I do though feel I get a relatively unbiased view of how escorts feel about their customers. Which generally is positive. I won’t pretend it is all roses, and I do hear of assaults and other abuse. These assaults and abuse though don’t come from the clients.
These threats and assaults are not from clients, but from partners and estranged partners who feel they still have access to their ex partners. they also come from ‘interested parties’, like next door neighbours.
yes some women work as sex workers and don’t tell their partners, and when their partners find out there can be threats and assaults.
Some women who break up from their partners, find their partners still feel that they have the right to control their partners.
This is why I want to see the sex industry more legitimised, and not underground so that the sex workers don’t feel they are the criminals.
A good example of this was two days ago. An escort asked that her advert was removed immediately fom my site. I asked why, and she said she was in trouble with the police. So I thought maybe she was sharing a flat with another escort. In the particular town she worked from, this could have been trouble as they have a zero tolerance of brothels. No it wasn’t she had been beaten up by her EX partner, and the police had become involved. She thought she was the one in trouble and not the partner.
delphyne
I think Douglas knows more than enough about anal sex.
The people who pose the most danger to women in the sex industry, Elrond, are pimps and customers. You’re as deluded as Douglas.
It was Stephen Wright, a scumbag punter, who murdered five women in Ipswich, not their male partners. He even pretended to be “friends” with some of them. Same with that man who killed over sixty prostituted women in Vancouver – a punter who pretended to be friends with them, lured them to his home with the promise of drugs and then murdered them.
You want the sex industry legitimised so society will accept your vile sexually exploitative behaviour. No deal pal, the world is finally beginning to wake up to exactly what your behaviour means to the women you use.
Are you a member of the IUSW BTW Elrond?
delphyne
The TV program, which I never saw, must have been very brave for both the client and the escort to appear on. It also must have been a bit contrived. What do you talk about in front of the cameras? You don’t talk about intimate personal things that might identify with your friends. It is actually going to be alot easier to talk about sex than anything else.
I know you will hate this, but you do choose an escort by what they can provide. If they don’t provide what you want, or you don’t click with them, then you won’t see them again. I for one have chosen an escort for a long week event in a few months time. Before I asked her to come on this event, I checked she would enjoy it. No not by asking her directly, but by over many visits, and many dinner dates understanding her likes and dislikes. In different circumstances I would certainly want her to be my permanent partner. So when I asked her (not in person, so under no pressure), she accepted. I am happy, and I know she is also.
Oh and she is one of the Escorts I know who have written to her MP condemning the law changes.
Actually, prostitution heeds back to pre dark ages; remember “the oldest profession” shtick? So advocating for radical changes in prostitution is not harking back to some virtuous times but is actually encouraging essential societal shifts. We think it’s been around way too long.
I don’t understand your response Elrond. Are you saying you were the punter on TV.
Are you a member of the IUSW?
All over the word it is acknowledged that “increase in rapes” means increase in the legal agencies respectful response to rape reports often caused by lawsuits and public pressure. When the law takes the crime of rape seriously more women and boys report. Thus the numbers begin to reflect the reality of the female experience.
No study is complete with out a corresponding history of rape legislation changes, police response, victimwittness protection legislation and conviction rates.
Delphyne, you’re quite right concerning Steve Wright, of course, but you nake the mistake of conflating all punters with Wright.
Now I presume from your comments you would say you’re an abolitionist? Peter Sutcliffe, the Yorkshire Ripper, was an abolitionist. There’s no record of him ever having been a punter. He told his brother after the trial he was “just cleaning up the streets, our kid.” He may have had a rather different and somewhat monsterous direct action approach to abolitionism, but an abolitionist he was.
You see, you make these assertions about punters. A London study showed 60% of violence against prostitutes does not come from punters. It comes from strangers, their family, the state and yes indeed, in some cases, ‘pimps’.
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/323/7306/230
But, of course, it all depends what you classify as ‘violence’. There are those who take the Dworkinite attitude that all heterosexual sex is violence by men, irrespective of prostitution being involved. Others see all prostitution as violence to women, despite a significant slice of it not even involving women and a significant further slice consisting of men paying woman to submit the men to pain and humiliation, and even a tiny further slice consisting of women doing the paying. And despite all the evidence from the relevant websites very clearly indicating that the vast bulk of sex workers and the vast bulk of their customers get along perfectly well most of the time.
Among the 80,000 persons in prostitution there is, of course, appalling cases of abuse, indeed there probably is among any collection of 80,000 persons, but made all the worse this case by the abrogation of responsibility by successive governments to do anything other than drive prostitution further and further underground.
Witness the 1885 Criminal Law Amendment Act that made brothels illegal “for the further protection of women and children” as it says at the top, followed by the mass closure of these premises, the consequential flooding of the streets with prostitutes and the resulting ideal conditions for Jack the Ripper’s Whitechapel Murders three years later. Some ‘further protection.’
It’s very easy to grab the high moral ground. But be careful – in this case it’s crowned with sinking sands.
I am not deluded that there are men out there who will harm sex workers, as there are members of the public who will kill and maim for any reason. Yes we can pick on men who have killed many sex workers. Likewise maybe we should ban schools in America where there seems to be rather a high mortality rate from deranged students with guns.
What I want to see is safe working conditions for sex workers, in what can be a solitary job I am under no disillusion, because any law change will not affect me or the escorts I see. I see self employed independent escorts, and even if the Norwegian/Swedish law was enacted, it would have absolutely no affect on me.
What I want to see though is all the women who chose to work in safe conditions like shared flats and agencies to continue to do so. The proposed legislation will allow brothels to be closed down more easily, forcing women to work in unsafe ways. Luckily many police forces are more relaxed about prostitution and realise that closing it all down would be counter productive. The Met mentioned this in select committee the other day. Steve Wright would have had more difficulty killing the sex workers if they had been working in a brothel.
In so many places where legislation has been invoked, the result has been more assaults on sex workers. Scotland is a good example. Glasgow (I know it is bigger than Edinburgh) has far more assaults on sex workers than Edinburgh. Edinburgh legitimises the sex industry with saunas, while Glasgow has a zero tolerance. Glasgow has a far higher percentage of street workers than Edinburgh. It is far safer to work in Edinburgh as a sex worker.
Since the tightening up of street work in Scotland, the assaults on street sex workers in Edinburgh has increased. the Aberdeen tolerance zone was closed, sex attacks have increased and sex is now sold in the pub and bar doorways. Anecdotal evidence suggests prostitution in Aberdeen has increased because it has now moved into the city and not in the the controlled managed zone.
Finally I don’t consider myself to be sexually exploitive. Indeed I consider myself to be exploited.
delphyne
I don’t understand your response Elrond. Are you saying you were the punter on TV.
No I was not on the TV program. I would not be so insensitive to ask the escort to pay for her meal, that does sound bad manners,
Are you a member of the IUSW, Elrond?
I’m amazed you’re more coy about that than you are that you pay women to use their bodies for sex.
Not bad manners paying to bugger her though Elrond? Even 20 years ago prostituted women weren’t routinely expected to put up with anal sex, but punters get increasingly sadistic and grow increasingly demanding for more damaging and painful acts that they can commit on the bodies of women.
Why don’t you take up masturbation and leave women alone?
Exploited by who Elrond?
delphyne
Sorry I miss that little bit about am I a member. Nope, I am not.
Can’t you get it into your head that this is consensual sex albeit for money. Yes there is a negotiation of services and prices. The women though has the final say as to whether to accept the contract or reject it. And yes they do say no. I know many of my advertises do say no to clients.
Cath
Tongue in cheek comment. The bargain I make with women is a contract beneficial to me, companionship, and to them, money. I suppose I feel exploited by my desire for female companionship. Masturbation is a poor substitute for a friendly face, dinner and a little hanky panky.
I do find it interesting that anal sex is being held up as some kind of indicator of something in these post-gay rights days. In my own non-commercial heterosexual experience I have certainly had a partner who enjoyed anal sex as much as vaginal. Are we about to outlaw heterosexual anal sex now we’ve just legalised homosexual anal sex? Maybe we should all equip our crotches with traffic lights?
Elrond, not all men have to pay for female company – why do you?
These abusers are starting to show their true character
Are you a bit hard of thinking stephenpaterson? We’re talking about punters demanding anal sex on the list of sexual activities they expect women in prostitution. Nothing to do with what people do together in private non-commercial relationships. If you want to find out how enjoyable or otherwise anal sex is though, why don’t you get someone to do it to you?
That crack about Peter Sutcliffe BTW – disgusting but exactly the kind of low level I’d expect you to be aiming at. Sutcliffe was exactly the same kind of woman-hater as Stephen Wright and the Vancouver murderer. Those kind of men hate women but want women kept in prostitution so they can abuse and even murder them. For Sutcliffe women in prostitution were easy targets, as they are for so many other misogynistic men who want to work out their hatred on women directly.
Noticeable that you ignored the claim from that survey though that 40% of the violence that prostituted women experience comes from their clients. I can’t believe you think that link actually supports your arguments.
jo22
Actually I don’t have to pay for sex and companionship.
The reason I do though is a mixture of all kind of things. Its because of the fun, the thrill of doing something illicit (I know its legal, but society in the main condemns it), meeting new people and friends, and being away in hotels most days of the week working 12 hours a day. Yes there is a convenience factor to this as well. To me if there was no supply, then there would be no demand.
Through this I have met many who I would call friends, who now ring to discuss their business. We support each other and help out in need, like one friend who texted me for money because she and her children had run out of money on holiday. How can one refuse.
delphyne
You are the type of person who would close brothels forcing the women onto the street and increase the risk of assault by 10 times.
What is this demand for anal sex. Yes some men want anal sex, some women want to provide it. many women don’t want anl sex and many men don’t. Its the same as with Oral With and Without condom. Some provide the service, other don’t
Yes once I had anal sex with a sex worker. She instigated it not me. So where is this abuse then.
A disproportionately high level of violence to prostitutes occurs to street workers, a fact shown in studies and accepted by all sides in the debate. A very significant amount of this is from abolitionists in one form or another, from drunken abusive louts to residents concerned for their property prices, to maniacs like Peter Sutcliffe, to the law with its abolitionist attiude.
Peter Sutcliffe was not a punter, he was an abolitionist, however deranged, and to call an abolitionist an aboliitionist is not a ‘crack.’ I do not tar all abolitionists, not punters, nor sex workers, with the same brush.
Indeed, street sex workers are easy targets, all the more so because they’re very often on high levels of Class A drugs. The sooner the Government puts some decent cash into addressing their drug problem the better, instead of driving them to places where they can;’t be seen with kerb crawling clampdowns.
A drugs. The sooner the Government puts some decent cash into addressing their drug problem the better, instead of driving them to places where they can;’t be seen with kerb crawling clampdowns.
As seen in Edinburgh and reported by the outreach organisation Scotpep.
Elrond, you said you feel exploited. Your reasons for buying sex don’t make me feel for you. Do you know what exploitation is?
Stop lying Paterson. It’s disgusting.
You want to keep women in prostitution so that women have to face the violent punters, pimps, the sadists, the would-be rapists, and even the murderers like Sutcliffe, Wright and the Vancouver killer. You project yours and other men’s sadism on to people who want to put an end to this exploitative, dangerous and sometimes lethal trade. It’s unspeakably low.
Delphyne your contempt for humanity does neither you nor your ideology any good. Accept that only listening to others views and accepting the free agency of humanity will alter conditions of abuse. Using the law to force ideologies results in further abuse and misery.
The law at present hurts women and the proposed law will not stop rape or abuse but it will rather result in further assaults on women and men and peoples lives being destroyed for having the audacity to engage in consensual sex. The worse thing is that the very people you say that you want to help will be further abused. A recent case of a trafficked victim who was rescued by the police was reported by a client. This case was reported by th Poppy project although in press releases they failed to mention the fact that the victim was rescued by the agency of a client who you and others want criminalised.
I repeat that free agency of consenting adults will continue to exist regardless of any legal restriction but those who are coerced will be exploited with out recourse to any rescue because the people who are best able to inform will be terrified of conviction. How will this help victims of trafficking. If street girls desperate to pay their dealer are forced into dangerous areas and because of the legislation you support are forced to accept the attentions of abusive clients whom normally they would reject then explain to me how your law is going to protect them.
It is ideology ignoring human rights and endangering the most vulnerable. Why can you not see this. Support sex workers rights and work with sex workers to find ways of eliminating abuse. That is what happens in other industries. This one is no different.
Douglas
Eh, I don’t have contempt for humanity, I save my contempt for pimps and johns, Douglas. Pity there are so many of you on this thread.
I know you don’t like the fact that I uncovered the scam you are trying to pull with the IUSW, but there’s no need to be insulting.
You do understand that clients who use women trafficked and forced into prostitution are raping them? Are you able to compute that? They should all be in prison, not just the traffickers. Only men could set up a system where men were able to sell women to other men, against the women’s will and the male buyers of those women would not be seen as committing a crime. Thankfully that is now changing.
You’re interested in protecting your profits and paying for that townhouse in Newcastle, not in protecting women. I also get the feeling you’re pretty keen on publicity given your new guise as fearless sex work advocate. Those things might be great for you but neither are good for women in the sex industry.
Douglas, there was a report – I shall try to find it – that all the ‘clients’ who had contacted the Poppy Project about trafficked victims had had sex with them (read raped them) first. What saviours they are.
As for (more) ‘contempt for humanity’, I think your/your partner’s agency giving women away for free as competition prizes qualifies.
Delphyne the greatest advocates of exit strategies are the NSWP which also support decriminalisation. They are not mentioned in the governments plans at all which even you have to admit is ideology being more important than practical solutions by people who know the industry better than anyone else.
The government has failed to consult with sex workers but has created a proposal for a change in the law that ignores the wishes of both sex workers and those who work most closely with sex workers on a daily basis.
The governments ideologues supporting the proposed legislation have been found out for using suspect statistics to create salacious headlines.
You and your colleagues attacks on anyone who supports the simple fact that the best way to create good policy is to actually speak to the people whom the policy pretends to wish to help suggests an unwillingness for constructive dialogue.
I don’t discount your convictions but please listen to the people who work in the industry because we know our industry better than you or anyone else.
I speak out through conviction with out payment and at some risk to myself. It would be very easy to be quiet but if injustice happens it is I believe my duty to speak for those too afraid or unable.
I have known escorts targeted and their homes daubed with paint and their children outed at schools for speaking out or being outed by abolitionists. I am out however and refused to be frightened by bullies.
Douglas
The IUSW and ECP have had much success in getting the media to question the facts and statistics that have been presented to them by Jacqui Smith. The recent BBC Radion 4 program, Friday, and on the today program questioned these statistics and ended up showing the lie that Fiona MacTaggart was presenting.
I get the feeling the abolitionists realise they are going to be defeated, and that this blog is a rather last ditch attempt to discredit the IUSW and ECP. My regret is I have given this thread the Oxygen it does not deserve.
I am glad there are true feminists who blog, and support the rights of sex workers.
http://ohbastard.wordpress.com/new-prostitution-laws-in-the-uk/
http://renegadeevolution.blogspot.com/
# jo22 Says:
Elrond, you said you feel exploited. Your reasons for buying sex don’t make me feel for you. Do you know what exploitation is?
I don’t want you to feel for me. It is my life style choice. As it is the choice of those I buy sex from. Nope I don’t feel exploited, that was a tongue in cheek remark. I should no better than to joke on sites like this.
Primark
As for people exiting prostitution, have any one of you actually helped people leave prostitution. I have.
The IUSW has not hidden that fact that it is an inclusive organisation for those who work directly as sex workers, or those work on the periphery. Again this appears as a last minute attempt to discredit the organisation. Please read this article from the BBC with quotes from Catherine Stephens. It clearly states that some members of the IUSW are parlour owners.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7786629.stm
“But London’s massage parlours, saunas, brothels and streets are the work places of a much wider range of women and men.
The International Union of Sex Workers (IUSW) includes middle-aged parlour owners, men who sell sex to men and girls who work on the street with drug addiction problems, among its members.
And, like all workers, they face extra financial pressure at Christmas, says IUSW spokeswoman Catherine Stephens. “
Ok folks, this piece has now gone up on the Liberal Conspiracy site: feel free to join in the discussion there.
http://www.liberalconspiracy.org/2009/01/11/betraying-sex-workers/
My what a lot of comments you’ve got Cath. Can I just confine myself to saying one thing.
The idea that prostitution ‘stops’ rape:
What if in fact it encouraged rape. Because if you’re saying that men, deprived of the ‘right’ to buy sex, rape instead, that tells you a lot about those men. And the ideas that being able to buy sex fosters.
‘There are those who take the Dworkinite attitude…’
You do realise that Andrea Dworkin worked as a prostitute? Or does her voice not count because she wouldn’t have agreed with you?
all feminists and especially anti prostitution feminists have apparently had no contact whatsoever with the sex industry, either as ‘worker’ or as workers advocate, because didnt you know we’re all daily mail reading women who saw a bad tv program about traffiking once and our delicate sensibilities are feeling threatened.
or shorter the pimps and punters on this thread – “you bitchez have no right to talk because i said so. get back in the kitchen or get on your knees, your ‘choice'”
“I have known escorts targeted and their homes daubed with paint and their children outed at schools for speaking out or being outed by abolitionists. I am out however and refused to be frightened by bullies.”
Not in Newcastle, I work there, and such circumstances could hardly be expected to escape the notice of the police.
I was also once a fairly big deal in the media sector in Tyneside, I know dozens of journalists and what is being described would be communicated to me.
The mealy mouthed denials by pimps of ‘where does it say sex on my web-site’ is in stark contrast to the queers who went to prison in the 1950s and 1960s.
They’re not so proud of pimping as to want to go to jail for their proseletyzing.
A pimp is no better than an internet pedophile, they have so much in common, it is an activity cloaked in cowardnice.
Yvette Doll
“The IUSW and ECP have had much success in getting the media to question the facts and statistics that have been presented to them by Jacqui Smith. The recent BBC Radion 4 program, Friday, and on the today program questioned these statistics and ended up showing the lie that Fiona MacTaggart was presenting.”
The BBC wouldn’t dream of accepting anything Jacqui Smith said, so that isn’t the point, nobody with GCSE math would take a Home Office statistic as fact.
What we can show, and did prove, is that very many of the young women, on the BBC’s very first photo-shoot of the windows in Amsterdam, are now dead.
Gangsters waving pistols in up-market brothels provoked Amsterdam to accept that the era of state sanctioned prostitution was a recipe for an unstable society.
The city fathers didn’t care about prostituted foreign women, they cared about police officers too frightened to walk the streets.
Events in New Zealand are heading in the same direction.
Yvette Doll
“The governments ideologues supporting the proposed legislation have been found out for using suspect statistics to create salacious headlines.”
That is better than dressing up young looking wmen as schoolgirls for pedophiles.
“I really like the plain grey skirt,white blose, small chest in a training bra, black tights and M&S white knickers look. Anyone any suggestions?”
http://www.punternet.com/forum/showthread.php?p=15964
From Punternet
To have credibility with the UN, the starting position is to smirk at British govt. statistics and because they are so devalued, there is no point offering states to the British govt.
“Actually this may have been a mistake for my peace of mind: the dress was a primary school uniform, rather than a secondary one, and she was totally convincing”
http://www.punternet.com/frs/fr_view.php?recnum=53661
From Punternet
‘Douglas’s attitude to the cover story seemed to be one of weary exasperation. Of course they’re going to have sex, his expression said, but if we talked honestly about it I might be busted for immoral earnings and the police would have to waste time pushing working girls back on to the street. John’s denial, though, was much more interesting: an odd hybrid of legalistic game-playing and genuine psychological resistance to the notion that he was selling sex. It wasn’t that he didn’t know perfectly well what was going on (otherwise why squirm so uncomfortably about the headmaster who rang up requesting the youngest escort on the books to dress up as a schoolgirl?)’
Newcastle’s premier executive escort agency, Christony Companions
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_/ai_n16657627
Paedophile theming and pimping is often the same game.
Yvette Doll
I was recently maligned just like Douglas Fox in another blog recently. I responded by telling the haters that their mischaracterization of me and my encounters with law enforcement is another example of how they are only interested in silencing actual sex industry workers’ first hand accounts of corruption. Their attempts to assassinate my character sends a clear message to all women and sex workers that the anti porn/prostitution haters are in bed with the dominate white male culture who use criminalization as a means debase our worker centered voices and are therefore not the people to go if one’s been a victim or a witness of rape, robbery, theft, coercion, assault and murder.
Sex industry workers are discredited no matter what service we provide. It’s interesting to me that haters employ the capitalistic model of trade unionism to oppress prostitutes and our right to hire support staff. They use this model to define for us who our bosses are, so they can deny us support staff and dictate the ‘cooperative model’. This very act of defining for us what our work conditions ought be and who we can enter into contracts with is the act of a being a boss. When citizens, of the UK or other, think they have say in a profession they don’t work in, they act as the the slave owner and are not worthy of the pronoun ‘abolitionist’.
I would much rather spend time writing and reading with sex industry folks articulating positions on who’s boss in the sex industry and how the imposition of capitalist and their interpretation of how trade union models as the excuse to usurp our voice in efforts to silence us and how we’re going to rid ourselves their oppression.
maxine: I think you will find that most radical feminists will either stop reading, or stop taking you seriously, when you come out with shit like “anti porn/prostitution haters are in bed with the dominate white male culture”. Big hint: they are primarily who we are fighting against.
You prattle on about the workers, fine and dandy. However, think a little deeper. Instead of supporting prostitution (which is not the same as supporting prostitutes), you are supporting rich (primarily white) dudes to buy the bodies of poorer women. Women still have not achieved equal pay in the general workforce, nor do they have as many career opportunities if they have taken time out to have children etc. Prostitution is a ghetto set up. The choice is an illusion.
It is you who are in bed with the rich white dudes. Figuratively and literally.
I am an academic writing a book about a variety of sexual issues, with the general theme that most ideologies have something to offer on most issues, but also produce foolish and inhumane results if taken too far.
I would like to add some questions to this discussion:
do some of the abolitionists take the view that there is something essential about a prostitution relationship, meaning that selling intimate sexual acts is always and necessarily wrong because sex is such a central part of a woman’s being? My impression is that some women have this view of sex based on personal experience, whilst others are more able to detach themselves from sexual acts. Someone who feels less intimately bound up with sexual acts she is performing will obviously have a more pragmatic view of prostitution.
Similarly for clients: websites where they discuss their experiences suggest that most of them are aiming for something quite close to a ‘girlfriend experience’. I’m inclined to take this at face value, but I think it’s obvious to some of the contributors that this couldn’t possibly be what clients want.
I think the diversity of women engaged in prostitution needs to be acknowledged. A drug addicted 14-year-old coerced onto the street by a violent pimp is in a very different situation from a 35-year-old independent escort advertising services at £100 per hour from her own website. It is obvious that men should be discouraged from having sex with the adolescent, but less obvious that they are doing anything wrong with the independent escort.
I think it is helpful to distinguish between people trafficking for sexual purposes, which involves tricking and coercing smuggled people into prostitution, and people smuggling, which involves getting someone illegally from one country to another. The problem is that once someone has arrived illegally they become extremely vulnerable, so that smuggling tends to take on aspects of trafficking. My impression is that the government is tending to assume that any evidence of migration is evidence of trafficking. Immigration policy is obviously bound up with this issue: if there is free migration there is much less scope for trafficking.
There is also a relationship between drug policy and prostitution: if drugs were simply legalised or freely available from the health service there would be little reason to engage in prostitution because of addiction, and street prostitution would be a less desperate enterprise than it is now.
I think that underlying the heated debate there is basically a different set of attitudes to each of these issues.
“It’s interesting to me that haters employ the capitalistic model of trade unionism to oppress prostitutes and our right to hire support staff”
Then one needs to look further than the GMB, which is right wing.
YD
“I was recently maligned just like Douglas Fox in another blog recently.”
CH4 hardly took a shine to him, and they are radical and very open-minded. Did he not score high on their squirm factor?
CH4 commission lots of TV programmes and madams, pimps, they come straight out and admit what they do.
‘”Where on our website does it say anything about having sex?” asked Douglas, one half of Newcastle’s premier executive escort agency, Christony Companions’
How could one believe such a person?
Yvette Doll
Pimps renamed as support workers. Orwell would be so pround.
It’s getting a bit of a habit but …… Maxine, is this you?:
“Doogan operated an escort service known as “A Personal Touch.” Two of her employees, Kristin Olson and Rebecca Lund, testified at trial about their work for Doogan and Doogan’s knowledge of the sexual nature of their work. Each testified that she made house calls for A Personal Touch. Each call involved going to a customer’s house or hotel room for fifty minutes. Most calls involved sexual acts. Olson and Lund received $150 from each customer, and met Doogan after each call to give her a fifty to sixty dollar share.”
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/conductunbecoming/pensions/docs/ring/5_statevdoogan.html
This is me:
“They had no evidence — just the word of two witnesses who Dan Ring was using for his own sexual thing. King County should be ashamed and held accountable.”
Lund was also reported at the time of the Eurosport trials to be in a relationship with Ring, said Janine Taylor, Ring’s ex-wife, yesterday.
Taylor was also dating Ring, whom she met during the Eurosport bust because she was arrested and refused to testify against Doogan. Taylor said a friend who was another witness in the trial talked with Lund in the witness waiting room. The friend told Taylor that Lund had stated she was dating Ring and was in love with him. Taylor said Ring didn’t deny having a relationship with Lund, but said she was nothing more than a confidential informant. Years later, Taylor discovered Ring was in a sexual relationship with Lund.
Lund, who now goes by the name Rebecca Rose, has refused to comment. But she sent the P-I an e-mail this week saying: “Witness, yes. Prostitute, no. Shame on you.” An appeals court opinion in the case stated, however, that Lund testified about the “sexual nature” of her work for Doogan, and that she received $150 from each customer.
Both escort service operators denied the women’s court testimony. After several years of appeals and retrials, each agreed to lesser misdemeanor charges in the end, they said.
Likewise, Doogan said she also suffered over three years and three trials fighting her case. She spent time in jail and tens of thousands of dollars before ultimately agreeing to plead guilty to a misdemeanor charge — a deal she made only when she ran out of money, she said.
“It’s a scarlet letter,” Doogan said in a telephone interview from San Francisco yesterday. “Just the mere mention of profiting and promoting prostitution, you’re just convicted because you’re accused of it.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/235228_ringfolo04.asp
@Stormy: “Big hint: they are primarily who we are fighting against.”
And yet, they are re-writing laws to satisfy your ideology. Hmm…. I mean, if they were so supportive of prostitution, do you honestly believe these regulations and legislations would ever see the light of day in a male-controlled political forum? Some of the biggest supporters of laws like these, outside of radical feminist circles, are from the patriarchal, male-dominated forums like the Christian Church and the most conservative political parties who, outside of this issue, stand opposed to important feminist issues such as reproductive health and equal pay. These are the people who like to promote the unfair image that a woman who is a feminist is somehow less than a woman. Yet their help is eagerly accepted by radical feminists who want to abolish the sex industry. Why?
“You prattle on about the workers, fine and dandy.”
Good job minimalizing, Stormy. So you consider talk about worker rights “prattle”? How demeaning. It reminds me of what patriarchal men say whenever women correctly raise complaints about equal rights, fair pay, etc. “Prattle”. So when they apply that word to your concerns it is “patriarchal” and “demeaning”, which it is. But you apply it to the equally valid complaints made by sex workers and it is described as “prattle”?
“Similarly for clients: websites where they discuss their experiences suggest that most of them are aiming for something quite close to a ‘girlfriend experience’. ”
You reckon, what about the Punternet review with the elementary ( primary) school uniform? What kind of a girlfriend experience was that?
Most of the ACPO & Crimestopper related investigations ( and it may be the same for the Poppy Project) had the ‘good punters’ also having sex with the child victims.
“Fiona Mactaggart, a Home Office minister, said tough measures were needed to tackle prostitution and she did not share the view that prostitution was the “oldest profession”. It was a form of child abuse “as most women prostitutes started at the age of 13 or 14”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1506519/Plans-for-licensed-red-light-districts-are-shelved.html
I’m not terribly ethused with Fioma MacTaggart, or any form of Blairism, however she has at times, hit the nail on the head.
“I have known escorts targeted and their homes daubed with paint and their children outed at schools for speaking out or being outed by abolitionists. I am out however and refused to be frightened by bullies.”
I’ve spent a mountain of money, over decades, on productions in Newcastle upon Tyne, I know the city very well, and that is simply not true.
“It wasn’t that he didn’t know perfectly well what was going on otherwise why squirm so uncomfortably about the headmaster who rang up requesting the youngest escort on the books to dress up as a schoolgirl?’ ”
That sounds more like a creature I have in mind. There is no such thing as a ersatz pedophile, the pathology, is identical.
Did that agency or its owners, call the local safeguarding children board or the police about the sexually twisted headmaster?
So ‘managed’ prostitution, usually turns into a happy time for drug dealers, criminals, pedophiles, and the moral turpitude that makes hiring a sae pair of hands, as teachers so very expensive.
Yvette Doll
“Yet their help is eagerly accepted by radical feminists who want to abolish the sex industry. Why?”
Good point, when my house caught fire two months ago, I forgot to quiz the fire dept. as they arrived. I just kept begging them to save my teddy bears.
Catholics and Donna Hughes & Julie Bindel, as a threesome, think smoking next to gasoline is dangerous, so we have two there agreeing with the Vatican.
The smert money is not smoking next to gasooline.
Yvette Doll
@Yvette Doll: Thank you for the flip comment and not actually addressing the point. Perhaps you are unaware that neither house fires nor smoking are gender issues so your comment, which I am sure you thought was clever (what a low bar you’ve set) is actually just…stupid. And a distraction. Do you lack the ability to actually answer the question, and so you resort to silly distractions and flip comments to keep observers from noting your deafening silence to my question?
Wait. That’s okay. I know the answer.
The concept works for gender, gasoline, or gun ownership or Gary Glitter.
It was only clever insofar it was sensible, which from the perspective of Darwin has seen me through the odd war, bombing, assassination attempt, and the ups and downs of teddy bear parenting.
“I really like the plain grey skirt,white blose, small chest in a training bra, black tights and M&S white knickers look. Anyone any suggestions?”
http://www.punternet.com/forum/showthread.php?p=15964
So, if the Pope, or President Bush, says that is wrong, I agree, because it is wrong, I know the world is not flat, I think it is a globe. I try to be sensible.
I am also guessing that Douglas Fox has as much chance of clearing US immigration as Robert Mugabe becoming the next Senator for Illinois.
Yvette Doll
Yvette, how does it feel to be sandwiched in between the Pope and George Bush in the bed? Which one turns you on the most? It should give you pause that maybe you are WRONG if you happen to share an opinion with a former Nazi and the Invader of Iraq. Do you really think that the Pope and the President care about trafficked women? Get serious.
And please stop quoting that punter who likes the “schoolgirl” look. It doesn’t add to the discussion.
And it’s great that you mentioned George Bush, because Junior has caused more trafficked women than any other president by invading Iraq. There are hundreds of thousands of Iraqi refugee women working as prostitutes in Syria and Jordan. All thanks to him.
The schoolgirl thing is what will get some people yanked off planes and taken to Port Elizabeth. The USA, as a liberal democracy under President Obama, is about to clamp down on schoolgirl fetishism and the pimps who film it or sell it.
That particular schoolgirl look is called pedophilia.
Yvette Doll
That’s right, Yvette. Let’s talk about a schoolgirl fetish when Iraqi women are prostituting themselves because of George Bush, who you agree with so well. Do you agree that Iraqi women should be forced into that, you who are so concerned with trafficked women?
And President Obama will have other things to worry about besides men who like grown women wearing school uniforms. The ecomony in the United States has gone to pot, and he is going to have to fix it. Not to mention the Israeli/Palestinian fighting.
Oh, and thanks for your concern about the Iraqi refugee women I mentioned. It’s funny how no rad feminist will ever, ever talk about them.
So George Bush is like Douglas Fox?
I could see that being almost sellable in Chicago, especially as President Obama is really not veryhappy, with the Girls Gone Wild Crowd or ASACP, or sex worker unions etc.
“And President Obama will have other things to worry about besides men who like grown women wearing school uniforms.”
I just happen to know somebody ( strange isn’t it?).
A request for 5 billion is a request for 5 billion. You can factor in a thousand news reports and non-stop tabloid TV.
I think it was handed over to lawyers to look into. What I can tell you, is that Douglas Fox has no chance, none at all, of opening a franchise in the USA.
And it was not the George Bush people who card indexed that.
Yvette Doll
“I really like the plain grey skirt,white blose, small chest in a training bra, black tights and M&S white knickers look. Anyone any suggestions?”
http://www.punternet.com/forum/showthread.php?p=15964
Do you want a Quantico rated BP on that, it is just one word – pedophile.
“It wasn’t that he didn’t know perfectly well what was going on otherwise why squirm so uncomfortably about the headmaster who rang up requesting the youngest escort on the books to dress up as a schoolgirl?’
Your turn, what do you think ‘Fitz’ or your ‘Cracker’ say about such people?
What is the nature of the thing?
Yvette Doll
Dear Almanac
I can tell you a secret about US law enforcement, when in the doldrums, go out and arrest a pimp or a teacher.
Nobody has ever not got elected or promoted for arresting pimps, pedophiles, or teachers who were a bit too touchy feelie.
Obama was targeted by the pornography coalitions. He has no reason to do them anything but mischief, and remember, it is a recession.
Nobody likes a pimp in a recession.
Yvete Doll
We had a shower together (I love sliding against a soaped up body). She jumped out of the shower and gave me owo in the door (sorry about soaking the bathroom!), then we went back into the bedroom where she put on a gingham schoolgirl dress. Actually this may have been a mistake for my peace of mind: the dress was a primary school uniform, rather than a secondary one, and she was totally convincing…
Did you see that punternet review about an elementtary school uniform, that is your primary school, is that like 8 or 9?
“And President Obama will have other things to worry about besides men who like grown women wearing school uniforms.”
I’ve read, that Adult women in primary school uniforms, can be very convincing. I(‘ll tell you what it reminds me off.
The Japanese thing, men needing child porn before they can have sex with past their sell-by date females, you know like really old, 24 or 25.
A Plain School Uniform as the Latest Aphrodisiac
By Nicholas D. Kristof
http://www.anusha.com/jap-kids.htm
We know what the score is, men just want to phone their pimp and ask for the youngest and in a school uniform
“It wasn’t that he didn’t know perfectly well what was going on otherwise why squirm so uncomfortably about the headmaster who rang up requesting the youngest escort on the books to dress up as a schoolgirl?’ ”
England is the same as Japan, and te pimps cater for that.
Ersatz pedophilia, as a business.
Yvette Doll
I was looking at the pimp groupie ( feminist fightback) photos on flickr I stumbled on this. I would like to thank the real feminists ( reclaim the night?) who told them to foxtrot oscar.
This caused some debate amongst the marchers…I heard people repeatedly telling this group to fuck off.
http://flickr.com/photos/msnoir/3058927393/
Yvette Doll
The reason you are being attacked is that you are exposing these exploiters for the child rape that is at the foundation of the sex industry and you are using their own words to do it.
It is what they try so hard to hide.
You are doing us all a great service and I urge you not to be silenced. And I urge feminists in your geographical area to assist you in getting out the message, raw as it is.
Ahhh…Ms. Yvette…I really, really, hate to break this to you, since you are on such a roll of late; but you are simply wrong and completely off the beam on the subject of “schoolgirl fetishism” and pedophilia.
(Actually, you are, in my view, totally whacked on almost everything you post here and elsewhere, but that’s not the issue for now.)
First off…Joe Francis of Girls Gone Wild is hardly a pinprick in the vast world of porn (and his flicks barely qualify as such, anyway, since they don’t even go bsyond flashing, grinding, and the occasional girl/girl kiss and grope), so do you really think that the President-to-be would really give a rat’s ass about him?? Besides, most of us believe him to be a total asshole who uses young women without proper consent and proper compensation. But, hey, any port in a storm, I guess, when you are looking for scapegoats.
Second…you seem to have lost the concept of “roleplay” fantasy: when two consenting ADULTS decide to dress up in roles like “school girl” and “teacher” in order to spice up their personal sex life, it is NOT considered “pedophilia”. For starters, “schoolgirls” can be adults (go to any university or adult ed class); they don’t neccessarily have to be underage adolescents. Secondly, actual relationships between teacher and student — at least, within the setting of the classroom – are strictly prohibited in most campuses under both ethics and sexual harassment guidelines. And third: using underage adolescents in such relationships is still a crime subject to jail time (see Joey Buttafucco and Amy Fisher, or Kathy LeTourneau).
Oh…and mere assertion of how pedophilia is so rampant in Britain as it is in Japan or the US without actual proof from respected agencies is not the same as actual proof…regardless of how much it justifies your beliefs.
Oh…and the reason why Obama might be “targeted” by the American porn industry could have something to do with easing some of the absolute assaults on their existence that took place during the Bush years; from the 2257 regulations to the prosecution of Max Haedcore and John Stagliano to the attempt to wipe adult sexual expression off the Internet (see the recent now revised FCC “free-but-porn-free Internet wireless spectrum” proposal, now revised to remove the “porn-free” bit). In the same way, Bill Clinton was “targeted” after the older Bush…but, I guess that doesn’t count because Bubba was a tool of the pornographers, as well as a philanderer??
One last thing:
George W. Bush = War Criminal + Budget Buster. Douglas Fox = Sex Worker Activist + Escort.
Tell me again how D Fox is worse than Dubya???
And…nice with the Mugabe for Illinois Senator smack….I guess that you really can’t tell THEM apart, can you??
Anthony
Oh…and two other things, Yvette:
1) Really, really BAD analogy with the lighting up at the gas pump, ma’am. I mean, wouldn’t that be, like, plain simple COMMON-ASS SENSE that anyone with a working brain cell would note?? I mean, even Larry Flynt, Nina Hartley, and even freakin’ Max Hardcore would probably agree with that.
2) Godwin would like to have a word with you regarding your description of “sex-positive” folk as “Jews the Nazis allowed to live to target other Jews”….really?? So what does that say about all the Jews NOT targeted by the Nazis?? Yeah….keep talking.
If you are going to trash us for opposing you, fine…just try not to be quite so assholic about it?? Kthanxbye.
Anthony
@Yvette Doll: “It was only clever insofar it was sensible, which from the perspective of Darwin has seen me through the odd war, bombing, assassination attempt, and the ups and downs of teddy bear parenting.”
Oh, teddy bear parenting! So you’re, what, 12? Should you even BE online? Your comment was not sensible at all. You obviously have a very tenuous hold on sensible. Again, you ignore and show a marked inability to answer a very simple question. I wonder, in addition to a teddy bear collection that almost went up in flames, did you also have a strawman collection? Obviously they didn’t catch fire because you’re still playing with them.
@Greenconsciousness: “Yvette Doll
The reason you are being attacked is that you are exposing these exploiters for the child rape that is at the foundation of the sex industry and you are using their own words to do it.
It is what they try so hard to hide.
You are doing us all a great service and I urge you not to be silenced. And I urge feminists in your geographical area to assist you in getting out the message, raw as it is.”
Being attacked? Oh dear, I am being quite nice actually. It is quite telling that I cannot defend myself but instead I’m attacking someone who I am sure has the best possible intentions toward my welfare. What do your patriarchal friends like to refer to that as? Oh yes, “For her own good”. It’s a phrase you should be familiar with from any sort of feminist reading. No, I am addressing her because she continues to make stupid, baseless comments that cannot be backed up by facts. Your opinion is not fact. Let me say this again: YOUR OPINION IS NOT FACT!
Simply answer the question, any of you anti-sex work folks here: Why have you allied with the dominant male culture in the form of accepting help from the Religious Right (predominantly white males) and the neo-conservative movement (predominant wealthy white males) to tell me what I can do with my body? WHY would these groups of men, who otherwise work (and succeed too often) to restrict my reproductive health, who would prefer to see ALL women married, pregnant and barefoot, at home “where we belong”, who do not believe a women is actually a women but an eternal little girl subservient to their father then to their husband (and then should they outlive hubby to their eldest son), ALL OF A SUDDEN, with regard to prostitution be so damned concern about the welfare of a woman in that system. A system, according to people like you Dollface and Greenie and Stormy and Cath, et al, that is the epitome of the patriarchy and male dominance that your male allies want to impress on all women.
At this point we must use logic, something that I know is unidentifiable to you. If what you say is correct and if the political, religious, social and economic motivations of your male allies in the government and various other authoritarian institutions hold true then should those men be, you know, on my side? No. Instead they are condemning a mythological substance (my soul) to an equally mythological place (Hell) but using their very real power, in this world, to make sure me and mine get there as soon as possible and in the worst shape imaginable.
Alas, I don’t expect an answer. On the other hand, the brick wall I’m leaning against can probably attempt a sensible argument…
Oooh, one more thing: whenever you wonder why feminism has such a bad rap these days and why women, even when they stand for, believe in and accomplish feminist ideals, run faster than Flo-Jo from that label, please, if you can stand it, look in the mirror.
Yvette is a man, or a liar. or both.
“First off…Joe Francis of Girls Gone Wild is hardly a pinprick in the vast world of porn (and his flicks barely qualify as such, anyway, since they don’t even go bsyond flashing, grinding, and the occasional girl/girl kiss and grope), so do you really think that the President-to-be would really give a rat’s ass about him?? ”
I think that was ( in part) because ASACP got told to take a hike.
It was embarrassing media reportage, it was a message, it wouldn’t be on a par with the Russians invading Finland.
It does go back to 2005 and the ASACP lobbying.
Yvette Doll
Renegade
Cath Elliot has put herself out of the running as my press agent, surprising, because, I hadn’t figured on hiring her.
I am in mourning, it was always my ambition to do a feminist version of ‘ I’m Waiting for the Man ‘ and that plan is now up to its ears in mud.
I’m trying to take it a day at a time.
Yvette Doll
It does not matter what gender Yevette is, boys are put on the streets as well as girls after abusive home life. What matters is that Yevette sees very clearly that the foundation of the sex exploitative industry is child abuse and Yevette has the intelligence to use the language of the industry to expose its criminal base; unlike these pimps who keep lying and denying and they are both men and women as well.
The real question is what is Renegade Evolution?
Boys behaving badly
At last the problem of sexual bullying in schools is being addressed. It’s part of a wider cultural sexism we all must look at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jan/08/schools-sexual-bullying?commentpage=1
If you look at that, the first thing we have are ‘diminishing’ concepts, so long as it is ‘bullying’ there is no obvious need to call the police.
The other thing it doesn’t mention is teachers, and as we know, the domestic British research via Childline, has almost as many teachers implicated as co-pupils.
(1 April 2004 – 31 March 2005), 8,637 children were counselled by
ChildLine about sexual abuse; of these, 4 per cent (381 children)
identified a teacher as the abuser.)
We can also say in a reasonably straightforward comparison, that the numbers of teachers permanently ( out the door and don’t come back) for sexual misconduct, is higher than the 140 pupils permanently excluded for similar.
The other element I take serious objection to is this part.
“And it’s not just girls who are being subjected to this barrage of misogyny; women teachers are increasingly finding themselves in the firing line as well.”
I can not honestly think, of a person, as a more unlikely champion of schoolgirls, than Chris Keates, of the National Association of Schoolmasters and Union of Women Teachers and I thought it was absurd for the Times of London, to publish that component of their news report.
“Chris Keates, of the National Association of Schoolmasters and Union of Women Teachers, said: “We conducted research into this issue in 2008.”
They didn’t do that ( from the pespective of the Jeremy Vine report) being the obvious point.
The NASUWT has not troubled itself in relation to the sexual harassment, or abuse of chldren, in any union study. What the union does do, is to exaggerate the abuses suffered by their members.
Chris Keates views on sexual issues relating to schoolgirls, is that she wants to see the abuse of trust provisions, of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 derogated. That is to say she wants to legalize teacher/pupil sex relative to the statutory rape provisions in the British legisltion.
“Sexual violence within schools isn’t a recent phenomenon by any means. In fact I’m pretty sure a lot of women could recount similar stories to those we heard on Monday.’
That’s very true, the UK is one of the only countries in the world, which doesn’t have teachers behaving badly media reports.
The kind of thing that relates the thirty top sex offenders in the profession, or the top twenty female offenders. So sexual violence, in schools can only be reported upon, if the pupils are doing it.
“If young people’s attitudes are to be changed, then the attitudes of those around them need to change too.”
I agree completely with that,
and that has to include unions campaigning for the decriminalization of guuardians having sex with their foster children.
Where the British go completely wrong, is they forget British teachers sexually victimize children in the United States, in person ( summer camps) and via the internet.
It is insulting, for the IWF to accuse the USA, given the questions about the competence & technological myopia ( PtP etc.) of IWF and SOCA/CEOP, and it is also preposterous for the UK to pretend US teachers are wild, and that British teachers are a safe bill of goods, which they are not.
It would also be useful, if the British prohibited sex offenders working in schools and that is something the British have resolutely refused to do.
and that the Equal Opportunities Commission’s guidance (PDF) on implementing the gender equality duty in schools appears to have been comprehensively ignored by the vast majority of local authorities and educators since it was published nearly two years ago. The guidance specifically states that schools should:
I did a survey on that, education departments, and I think I know the reason there is a great reluctance to produce written policies, or advice.
I have already referred to that problem.
“personal safety: girls may be able to run faster in trousers than a skirt and they may be less vulnerable to indecent assault”
http://83.137.212.42/sitearchive/eoc/Default4474.html?page=15370&theme=print
The EOC had meetings with the DfES about banning skirts and I don’t think it was very helpful for that to take place, nor to suggest that dress codes, ewre relevant relevant to sexual victimization.
I know what the UN committee view is, and what the HRW and AIUSA perspective was in the USA. I want the same UNCRC & CEDAW standards for Britain.
Yvette Doll
female, sex worker, cyncial
Ruth Morgan Thomas is not a ‘sex worker’ either, even though she lies about that fact whenever she is in a public forum where anti-prostitution folk are representerd. She also tells lies about the ‘increases in violent crime’ as a result of focusing on the buyers.
References, Julie, please. We haven’t forgotten
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/08/prostitution-open-door
What are you trying to prove with this? So I said ‘study’ and not ‘report’? So what?
Ruth Morgan Thomas is not a ‘sex worker’.
Catherine Stephens from the IUSW is a pimp.
Come on! Sue me!!!
Ruth Morgan Thomas has aided even more women than your work has led to the deaths of.
Why don’t you sue me instead?
Wouldn’t waste my time. Your opinions are irrelevent to me.
Catherine Stephens is a pimp.
“Ruth Morgan Thomas has aided even more women than your work has led to the deaths of.”
what a random and dumbass thing to say.
This is an interesting report, isn’t it?
Click to access World_Cup_2006_CT_Draft_Report.pdf
It’s a report on trafficking from an institute in Sweden. A report specially commissioned to look into human trafficking at the Word Cup in Hamburg in 2006. A report that concludes there was sweet FA trafficking at the World Cup in Hamburg in 2006. A report that not only does this, but also looks at umpteen previous cups and Olympics etcetera and concludes there was sweet FA trafficking at them, either, and then goes on to try to work out how all the fuss came about..
It seems a certain UK national newspaper was largely to blame. To quote para 4.1.1:
“In autumn 2005, most NGOs as well as law enforcement had long started their work on
concepts for World Cup activities and campaigns. A figure of 40,000 foreign prostitutes
or even 40,000 forced prostitutes who were expected to come to Germany for the World
Cup quickly resounded throughout Germany and beyond. Law enforcement and many
NGOs were quickly disassociating themselves from this figure as there was apparently no
basis for this estimate. However, the media were timely to pick up on the figure and it
persistently re-appeared. In the end, few seemed to know where it had originated from.
One of the experts interviewed for this study, together with co-authors, attributed the
first public mention of an estimate to the German Womens’ Council (Deutscher
Frauenrat), who used the figure of more than 30,000 prostituted that were to be
smuggled into Germany for the World Cup with reference to the women’s representative
of the German Association of Cities and Towns (Deutscher Städtetag). The German
newspaper “taz” then quoted the British Guardian’s “up to 40,000”. And subsequently,
in the German women’s magazine “Emma”, the quote became 40,000 forced prostitutes.
By this time the German Association of Cities and Towns had already disclaimed the
figure25.
Deary me. Wonder who on the Grauniad was responsible for this cry of Wolf?
Couldn’t be anything to do with this, could it?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/may/30/germany.features11
Julie Bindel can you please tell us how Catherine Stevens is a pimp.
Douglas
“Ruth Morgan Thomas has aided even more women than your work has led to the deaths of.”
Ruth Morgan Thomas belongs to the same statistical school as UK immigration, one couldn’t tanker oil using the same slide rule without painting Alaska black.
‘Violence went up from 11 attacks in 2001 to 111 in 2003 — a ten-fold increase’, says Ms.Ruth Morgan-Thomas of ScotPep.
Scotland is my second home, I work there frequently, and Ruth Morgan Thomas is without credibility in relation to verifiable, or supportable statistics.
So if List 99 is the NASUWT’s statistics taking a gap year, that is to say, NASUWT stats are unambiguously psychiatric, I can say Scot-pep are not far behind.
Yvette Doll
The person posting as ‘Julie Bindel’ here cannot be THE Julie Bindel, because if it were, she would be saying these things in her Guardian column.
If they were true.
The International Union of Sex Workers campaigns for full human, civil and labour rights and for full protection of the law for everyone in the sex industry and for meaningful consultation of people in the industry about decisions which will affect our rights and safety. We believe that everyone deserves freedom to choose, respect for those choices and the absolute right to say no.
When people deny sex work as labour it forces us to spend our time defending the existence of our work, instead of struggling for its transformation. Alice, migrant sex worker, London 2007
A group of workers organising to improve the conditions of their work is a union, and so the International Union of Sex Workers was the obvious title for our organisation. “International” both because there are many migrants involved in the organisation, and also because we are proud to be a part of the global movement for sex workers’ rights, that spans every continent (except Antarctica!).
Your freedom and mine cannot be separated. Nelson Mandela
We know that the primary difficulty we face is not our work itself but the conditions in which we work. This includes both conditions in the workplace, and in society as a whole – the stigma and social exclusion many of us experience. We see how legal status and social stigma combine to increase our vulnerability and enable abuse and exploitation within our industry. Such wrongs are often then blamed on the nature of our work, sometimes by those who themselves perpetuate them. Sex workers’ exclusion and vulnerability are perpetuated by those who refuse to listen to our complaints of actual violence and real abuses because they consider all our work to be violent and abusive.
If you have come here to help me you are wasting your time. But if you have come because your liberation is bound up with mine, then let us work together. Lila Watson, Aboriginal activist in Australia
Douglas
I am interested in your career.
The teacher with the ‘youngest girl fantasy’ did it cross you mind, if ‘Cracker’ and ‘Fitz’ and profiling books by psychiatrists in Britain, that you had a child protection issue there?
“It wasn’t that he didn’t know perfectly well what was going on (otherwise why squirm so uncomfortably about the headmaster who rang up requesting the youngest escort on the books to dress up as a schoolgirl?), ”
There is no such thing as ersatz pedophilia, that being the point.
“My second point. Schoolgirl. A few years an agency had pictures of one of their girls in pyjama/short shirt type clothing pulling along a big teddy bear. I thought it was appalling. I was physically disgusted at it. WTF were they trying to attract. Those pics remained online for a good few months before being pulled. Should girls offering escorting scenarios such as “School Girl” be banned too.”
http://www.ct-escorts.co.uk/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=6e9bfa3f5fa1bfba7c56d0fe43466123&topic=2085.0
Is that the agency you are connected to? Because the point seems to be corporately appreciated, so why is it happening?
Yvette Doll
“Jenny, one of the Christony employees who had allowed her work day to be filmed by John Alwen for The Escort Agency, didn’t seem too concerned that her next client might opt for casual chat about buddleias. Into her little overnight bag went lubricant, a schoolgirl outfit”
– Yvette
“Scotland is my second home, I work there frequently, and Ruth Morgan Thomas is without credibility in relation to verifiable, or supportable statistics.”
Oh, so you were there at the time working with the sex workers on the streets of Leith, then, Yvette? Perhaps we can have REFERENCES to YOUR statistics?
Oh well then, perhaps if ScotPep’s stats in The Scotsman here:
http://news.scotsman.com/prostitution/Prostitute-attacks-soar-as-new.3981268.jp
can be written off, we’ll have to get our Scottish stats from stories like this
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/7734480.stm
from the BBC and the police, then, maybe cross-ref with this http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/scotland/Safety-tips–texted-to.4163514.jp
from Scotland on Sunday or this
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/670614?UserKey=0
from the Press and Journal?
Oh no, you’re talking about Edinburgh aren’t you, where even the local Civic Trust wanted a tolerance zone reintroduced only to be defeated by nimbyists.
http://news.scotsman.com/scotland/Tolerance-zone-for-prostitution-is.4424908.jp
Such a pity they couldn’t find a place in a psychiatric institution for that nice Kenny MacAskill man.
Sorry folks, can’t read the whole thing, as I’ve only got about 50 years left on earth if I’m lucky. But one question. If a headmaster who wants a young sex worker dressed as schoolgirl is doing nothing wrong, I assume he won’t mind it being made public then?
Thought not.
Just to let you know Stephen, I’ve not been holding your posts in a moderation queue or anything, it’s just that if you put in more than one link the post gets caught in the blog’s spam filter (is that the technical term?) and then I have to ok it to let it through.
Hence the delay with some posts. ‘Cos I’m not here constantly to check it.
– Cath
“Just to let you know Stephen, I’ve not been holding your posts in a moderation queue or anything,”
Ah, thanks for that, Cath, I was getting suspicious, just about to don my black cap in fact.
stephenpaterson
We did police and hospitals. We have it on a linux machine which has been shipped to the USA, so I’ll also read your cites and get back to you.
On a non-related note the e-mail polling re: Cath’s criticism of my choice of composite words. That polling hasn’t worked in my favor.
So, my revision is, if Camille Paglia was a contemporary of Hanna Reitsch, the German aviatrix, Paglia would have a medal in gold with diamonds from the Fuhrer for being extraordinary.
I do mean that, and I will tell you why, Camille Paglia has talent, and she is not a person to retreat from ideas most would view as abominable, of course, she hasn’t been given a medal by a senior Nazi,
So my next ‘happening’ may be a comic, “Which Beatle do you want to marry?” I already have one or two quotations for it.
“Now, when people call me a neocon, what kind of idiots are they? I’m someone who is on the record as being pro-pornography–all the way through kiddie porn and snuff films. ”
http://gos.sbc.edu/p/paglia.html
So, Camille Paglia is a pimp groupie, and the offendiing composite wording on my part, was a mistake, of the same order as ‘Islamofascist’ & etc.
I thank all the vocab weaklings who e-mailed.
Best wishes
Yvette Doll
“Julie Bindel can you please tell us how Catherine Stevens is a pimp.”
Douglas
We can do Julie Bindel later.
Douglas
Global Moderator
Never Shuts Up
“There is also the fact that he did not abuse himself but only viewed images. Ok if there was not a market probably the images would not be produced but I think there has to be a word of caution in that the law can make criminals of people who have viewed images from a site where child porn exists with out them knowing it plus the age thing ie 1 hour can make all the difference between child abuse and legal viewing meaning being 17 or 18.”
http://www.ct-escorts.co.uk/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=9407bba8977a3a8bb2335ecd54c90292&topic=1450.msg14224
Do you agree that escort agencies & etc. and ‘trade unionists’ should have a good grasp of the ‘age’ aspects of Sexual Offences Act 2003?
I mean a good working grasp. not a year one way or the other.
Yvette Doll
http://ajk-sdchron-sexposleftist.blogspot.com/2009/01/ahhhlookee-hereyvette-doll-exposed.html
Stephen P. I don’t know what the link says and I can’t click on it because I’m at work. But is anything Yvette Doll is saying factually incorrect? If so, why not reply to that instead of people questioning what Yvette’s gender is (how is that relevant?) or whether Yvette has a teddy bear collection (how is that relevant?).
By contrast Douglas Fox claims he does not hide his escort agency owning status. Well not if you’re good with google, and can be arsed, no. But he often ‘forgets’ to mention it when it suits him. Like here.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/nov/19/prostitution-ukcrime
Is anything ‘Yvette’ says factual at all, as distinct from innuendo? If there aren’t any facts, they can’t be factually incorrect, can they? My understanding of the blog was that it was supposed to be about the credentials of the IUSW and consequently a discussion on the sex industry. Quite where ‘Yvette’s’ to my mind unhealthy prooccupation with paedophilia fits in, I’m at a loss to say.
http://ajk-sdchron-sexposleftist.blogspot.com/2009/01/ahhhlookee-hereyvette-doll-exposed.html
So now some other truths appear in the linky department.
stephenwankerson, the impartial but oh-so-caring observer who just happened to stop by: provides links to one of kennerson’s numerous blogs. (I recognise the URL, don’t bother going there polly)
kennerson is best remembered for his hatred of radical feminists.
co-inkydink? I think not. I posit that wankerson is not only a wanker, but a liar who misrepresents himself too. He’s not the first dude to just happen across a feminist blog and declare himself impartial/concerned etc etc.
As I said above, he is either lying to us, or lying to himself. Linking, nay multiple linking, to a well known radfem hater, puts his credibility in the porcelain.
These misogynist dudes are all in bed with one another.
“Mr Carlin implies here that Conridge was doing this in an educational institution.
However, as the article cites makes clear, he was actually banned from teaching
five years previously by Beds CC “following serious allegations of misconduct.” and
is described in the first paragraph as a “former music teacher”. ”
Mr. Carlin co-owned one of Gary Glitter’s record labels. Conridge was banned from every school in Bedfordshire and allowed to work (by the DfES) in Hertfordshire. He is one of many teachers who fall into that category.
Conridge was part of a large British controlled pedophile network which re-activated a project pedophiles in north America had lo0st to Law enforcement, the officers in North America, asked the British to deal with the proble along certain lines.
“Cath Elliot has; she has now publically repudiated and exposed him, and basically told him to fuck off.”
I was the silly moo who complain (to others). I can be quite sly. It didn’t get me anywhere.
There were exchanges, involving the crème de la crème of US feminism, behind the scene, and they decided that Cath Elliot had a legitimate point in relation to the use of a composite word, which should not have been joined together, the feminist equivalent of throwing a shoe at a Mullah.
And to be honest, pimp groupie, is what Paglia is. That was enough.
I have to be gracious enough to accept, that hurt feelings, needlessly caused, attracts a rebuke and that has now happened.
I made a passable attempt at an apology.
And I offer it again.
Kind regards
Yvette Doll
“Is anything ‘Yvette’ says factual at all”
I am the best lobbyist that money can buy, I deliver success. It is like hyping a record into the charts, if it costs ten bucks per item, it is worth it, one makes it back on the albums & etc.
I can really promise you this, Fox’s petition will be like feces to Jacqui Smith.
I also know more than Douglas Fox, he didn’t know the age precise criteria for the Sexual Offences Act 2003, 17 or 18, doesn’t do it.
Which is a bit of a worry, for an Escort Agency.
Yvette
You’re avoiding the question Stephen P. It’s you and others who are making ad hominem attacks on Yvette Doll, rather than arguing with what s/he is saying. Which I assume means you can’t argue with what Yvette is saying.
If Douglas Fox is supplying young sex workers to teachers who indulge in schoolgirl fantasies, then yes paedophilia is relevant. I don’t think the teacher would last long in his job if this became public, let’s put it that way.
Certainly Mr Fox’s authority as a moral arbiter is called into question. It is him who lambasts feminists for ‘lacking compassion’ for the poor “disabled” people he patronises and condescends to, and describes what he does as a social service the NHS should fund. Yet he is happy to encourage a teacher in carrying out “schoolgirl roleplay”.
I don’t think the government are consulting with the IUSW anyway, given their membership of less than 100, of xhich we don’t know the exact number of actual sex workers. Perhaps Mr Fox could tell us.
If you have this info Yvette, and can back it up, I’d go to the press actually.
To save us the trouble of following the link (cos I’m still at work and it will be barred), maybe stephen can provide a potted summary of the damning information on Yvette Doll. Other than possessing a teddy bear collection that is.
If Douglas Fox isn’t doing this, maybe he can correct that also?
“If Douglas Fox is supplying young sex workers to teachers who indulge in schoolgirl fantasies, then yes paedophilia is relevant. I don’t think the teacher would last long in his job if this became public, let’s put it that way.”
Douglas Fox, or somebody else called ‘Douglas’ at the same agency, does appear to be a bit weak on the age criteria of the Sexual Offences Act 2003,
“There is also the fact that he did not abuse himself but only viewed images. Ok if there was not a market probably the images would not be produced but I think there has to be a word of caution in that the law can make criminals of people who have viewed images from a site where child porn exists with out them knowing it plus the age thing ie 1 hour can make all the difference between child abuse and legal viewing meaning being 17 or 18.”
http://www.ct-escorts.co.uk/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=9407bba8977a3a8bb2335ecd54c90292&topic=1450.msg14224
So if Mr. Fox is worried about people, falling foul of the law, he should learn what the law is, 17 or 18, one o those is good for a SOA 2003 conviction.
I do not think he is the legislative authority he claims to be.
Yvette Doll
“a potted summary of the damning information on Yvette Doll. Other than possessing a teddy bear collection that is.”
Mr. Carlin has been revealed as a vile criminal
“I bet if someone does enough investigating into Carlin’s past, they’ll dig up some pedophilic accusations against them. People who are this spastic about such moral dilemmas are always the main people guilty of it.”
Well he did co-own Gary Glitter’s record company. Do we need anything more than that, has the case been adequately made, and he’s also a Catholic.
It looks jolly damning
Yvette Doll
“is to both to state the obvious (we ALL have problems) and to imply that this is
something particularly British. What evidence is there for this? I do not have any
evidence for or against but I would be very surprised if it were so. And I would
also be surprised if many – if not – most pornographic sites are just as “popular”
in the US as they are elsewhere. What proportion, for example, of sites are hosted
and/or mainly funded from US sources and customers?”
That ( posted to Yvette Doll exposed) relates to my funding,
these ‘pro-sex’ people are posting references to the blog under discussion, suggesting the US porn industry is out of control as per IWF & Becta statements, the reference is from Becta, which has a ‘child protection’ role,
each year the USA and Russia get slammed by British Ministers, and when the Americans ask the British govt. who they are supposed to be prosecuting and can they have a list of criminals, the British reply that it is all BS, and not to worry about it, they are only flim flamming their own public.
So a series of US experts have sent to Britain in person, to chide the British
Map shows where child porn has been downloaded 14 million times in last 3 years
http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/article10997.ece
So claims against the British, of 13.7 millions child pornography transactions over three years related to a handful of recent photos or victims.
Mr. Stephen P, is therefore not being consistent, if the IWF are right, and I presume that is his blog the Becta culled criticism was posted to, the US has half the world’s CP, which shoots out of the sky the US pro-sex people on the other blogs!
So why post something which attacks US porn & Mr Carlin, and only using the same ‘facts’ against Mr. Carlin as a vendetta. Because if the remarks are true, if the IWF are right, the US porn industry is evil and wicked.
“The public can feel confident in the IWF’s hard work over the last ten years combating these shocking crimes,” said Amanda Jordan OBE, Chair, IWF. “The test will be to bring the same commitment and effectiveness to other countries, particularly Russia and the US where the majority of child abuse content appears to be hosted. Meanwhile, the IWF will ensure the UK remains a hostile place for those who engage in illegal activities online to the detriment of the majority.”
The blog which exists to vilify, portrays the British criticism ( of the USA) as valid, but only as an utility to attack Mr. Carlin.
My position is that I am funded, to try to get the British govt. to stop governing via their press offices and to tell the public the truth.
Shock Scale Of Kid Porn In Scotland Revealed – The Daily Record
21 Jan 2008 … Shock Scale Of Kid Porn In Scotland Revealed … American Flint Waters has used pioneering technology to track the activities of perverts …
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2008/01/21/shock-scale-of-kid- porn-in-scotland-revealed-86908-20292933/ – 60k – Cached – Similar pages –
The IWF do not do Peer to Peer.
Yvette Doll
As far as I’m concerned, I merely became curious about who Yvette Doll was, Googled it, came across a site which purported to know some answers, or at least provide theories,and provided a link to the said site to this thread. I can no more vouch for the site than anyone can any site on the web, you check it out if you’re curious and that’s that.
And if ‘Yvette Doll’ wants to confirm or deny what the site says, that’s up to ‘Yvette Doll’.
I suppose threads on subjects like the sex industry inevitably produce more heat than light, passions on both sides being what they are, and I imagine few minds are changed at the end of the day, but I do believe it possible to communicate and I do believe debates can be educational. For example, earlier on the thread, I discovered the major escalation in UK rape stats up to a couple of years ago (when they started a steep decline), which is something I hadn’t known about.
The fact that comes from a prohibitionist (I presume) doesn’t stop me accepting it as a significant point and learning from the experience.
After reading I don’t know how many academic papers and viewing I don’t know how many sites, my conclusion to date is that a decriminalised model for sex work would be a great advance on where we in the UK now are, and I’m perfectly prepared to join a rational disvussion among adult prohibitionists and decrimialisers on the subject.
Some of my web friends have tried to dissuade me. “They always get nasty and personal,” they say. But then I think one has to accept that on a subject on which feelings run so deep. The trick is, I think, to be able to ignore the totally irrational members of threads whose only interest lies in trying to tear the ‘other side’ down ASAP like some kind of latter day Syvester Stallone in Rambo, until such time as they learn to be civil.
What does annoy me, though, is when somebody tries to hijack the whole debate, and turn it, in this case, into one about paedophilia, all the more so as they appear incapable of even spelling the word properly. At this point, sadly, extremists grab it as the most convenient weapon and the debate ceases to be about what it’s about and descends into a puerile slanging match which would have most children in or out of their school uniforms deriding us for immaturity.
It is perfectly obvious to everyone that someone who says an hour can be the difference between a person being involved in something illegally when they’re 17, and legally when they’re 18, is displaying a knowledge of, not an ignorance of, the Sexual Offences Act
I’m unsure where this headmaster with a penchant for escorts in school uniforms originated from on this thread, and what the connection with Douglas is, but why jump to the conclusion such a person, headmaster or not, is a paedophile?
Schoolgirl uniforms, along with nurses, WPc’s, etc etc, have been doing the rounds in escorting since at least the days of the earliest Carry On films. I can imagine very possibly that they represent to many men fond memories of their first girlfriends, but I’m only speculating and I’ve no doubt others on this thread will jump to more sinister conclusions.
And for those who choose that course, who knows if escorts with school uniforms do not provide a safety valve, and that without them we may get more child molesters?
So it seems a diversion from the main debate to me, obviously if people want to go down that cul-de-sac it’s up to them, I’d much prefer the main subject.
“Yvette Doll”: “Mr. Stephen P, is therefore not being consistent, if the IWF are right, and I presume that is his blog the Becta culled criticism was posted to,…”
Nope.
A presumption too far.
Again.
There is a problem, each year the FBI do most of the work for British policing, and every year they are damned to hell by the Ministers responsible for CEOP for allegedly tolerating extraordinary levels of child pornography to be hosted in the United States.
‘John Carr, Technology Adviser with children’s charity NCH, welcomed the evident success of the IWF programme.
“But NCH believes there is still far too much child pornography and everyone has a role to play in combating it. Every time a website with an indecent image of a child is accessed, or an illegal image is sent, a child is being abused,” he warned. “The Governments of the US and Russia need to up their game and stem the tide of child pornography leaving their virtual shores because it is putting children across the world at risk.”‘
http://www.out-law.com/page-6710
Leading UK NGO’s each year without fail, attack the United States for tolerating saturation levels of child pornography.
“All forms of child pornography and exploitation are to be deplored. That said,
Mr Carlin’s seeming anti-British and anti-European rhetoric will do little to
protect the children he clearly feels passionately about.”
That Becta commentary from the Stephen P blog, as you can see, the British reaction with passion to any suggestion that they should do their own detecting, and are in robust solidarity with the IWF and CEOP who are allowed a free hand to attack America, the FBI, and child protectionists, allied to the USDoJ.
If the British are right, it seems to be almost as if a FBI/Porn conspiracy of some kind exist, with the FBI idly tolerating vile crimes despite pleas from the civilized English. Only one side can be right, the perspectives are diametric opposites. I suppose with that in mind, I may have posted, once or twice, in a collegiate way, asking if any of the IWF statistics for the UK went to jail!
“Yvette Doll
http://news.soft32.com/britain-best-at-beating-online-child-porn-iwf_2603.html
Britain best at beating online child porn – IWF
This compared with just 0.2 percent of potentially illegal content that appears to be hosted in Britain, down from 18 percent in 1997.”
And nobody seems to know, if any of the 18 prcent of global CP hosting domestic to Great Britain, went to jail, the FBI say that in their view, it is entirely possible, the British may have ‘free-passed’ the individuals involved, and some of whom would be involved in the UK’s sex trade & teaching.
I would remind everybody, that Douglas Fox’s agency has been discussed in relation to the school uniformed pleasures of the odd British teacher.
The people, deserve the truth!
Yvette Doll
“After reading I don’t know how many academic papers and viewing I don’t know how many sites, my conclusion to date is that a decriminalised model for sex work would be a great advance on where we in the UK now are, and I’m perfectly prepared to join a rational disvussion among adult prohibitionists and decrimialisers on the subject.”
Great Britain perhaps had a decriminalised model for 18 percent of the entire world’s child pornography which was hosted in the UK.
So, if one or two of the sexual moralists, of America, lets call them radical feminists, want to have tea with Jacqui Smith, the plane tickets are on me.
I am also quite interested in Gary Glitter, who was British, and who had a passport, despite being a child sexual abuse epidemic in his own wrong.
Yvette Doll
” 1 hour can make all the difference between child abuse and legal viewing meaning being 17 or 18.”
So Douglsa Fox was measuring the eligibility of children for pornography ventures, BY THE HOUR. how very interesting, well I suppose, if one is in the business of catering for teachers with schoolgirl fetishes, that might be the management technique which delivers the best results for Mr. Fox & Co.
“John’s denial, though, was much more interesting: an odd hybrid of legalistic game-playing and genuine psychological resistance to the notion that he was selling sex. It wasn’t that he didn’t know perfectly well what was going on (otherwise why squirm so uncomfortably about the headmaster who rang up requesting the youngest escort on the books to dress up as a schoolgirl?”
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_/ai_n16657627
I had sympahetically interpreted ignorance of the SOA 2003 rather than the clock-watching version of schoolgirl fetishism, only just faux, by an hour.
Yvette Doll
( I am syndicating this because I am in a clothes designer union, I’m Yvette Doll, if I can’t be ia historically camp shop steward, who can? I’m doing it out of solidarity with Douglas Fox, my only regret is that I haven’t quite managed to get Jacqui Smith on the phone yet, to discuss school uniform dress codes)
“No, I won’t ask my local cops”
The plaid skirt or school uniform brigade are pedophiles, we have had ten yers of widepread computer seizures.
Look at Douglas Fox, and his agency, it has teachers asking for the youngest possible girl and a school unform.
He was also measuring the age of consent by the hour! and his agency does business with people who have a sexual paraphilia for school children.
I’m not surprised the police wanted to arrest him.
Yvette
Police worker in escort agency inquiry
From the Northern Echo, first published Sunday 23rd Jul 2000.
A POLICE finance officer has been arrested and questioned over allegations that he has been operating an escort agency.
Civilian worker John Dockerty, 27, was arrested early on Saturday and questioned on suspicion of living off immoral earnings.
The Durham Police employee had been on sick leave for the past eight months from his post at force headquarters at Aykley Heads, Durham City.
It is expected he will be suspended while the allegations are investigated.
Mr Dockerty and his business partner, clothes designer Douglas William Fox, 38, were arrested at their home in Consett, County Durham. The pair were questioned and released on police bail.
A police spokeswoman confirmed last night that two men, aged 27 and 38, were arrested on Saturday
Archive Home
From the Northern Echo
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk
© Newsquest Media Group 2000
Well you know Stephen. This thread is very long and it’s very hard to make out what half of it is about. I was under the impression that Yvette Doll (aka Mr Carlin I presume, I can google now I’m not trapped at work) was alleging that Mr Fox had supplied such an escort. It appears I misread – not surprising really.
Having said that ‘Douglas’ on the thread, which I’ve now also read does seem ambivalent, not to mention sympathetic to Chris Langham. And those who view child porn generally.
No paedophiles (and people who view child porn are paedophiles) are not ‘mentally ill’, Douglas whoever you are. They know what they’re doing and they know it’s wrong. Which means legally speaking they are not mentally il. Otherwise Chris Langham would have had an insanity defence -which would require either that he did not know the nature and quality of the act he was doing or that he knew he was committing the act but – because of mental illness – did not know it was wrong (ignorance of the law is no excuse).
The point is paeophiles just don’t care. Because they think satisfying their sexual urges is more important than the rights of children. If they were insane they wouldn’t go to the lengths they do not to get caught, like Langham did. ‘Douglas’ is probably right that prison won’t stop them though.
And I’m typing this on a Hewlett Packard computer. Who used a Gary Glitter song in adverts. And I’ve actually seen Gary Glitter live in concert. Am I a paedophile?
I’m interested in what people have provably done/said really. Yvette Doll may well be someone with a paedophile past – you could be right Steven, any man could be (including you of course). I’m automatically suspicious of all men actually. Personal experience. Paedophiles don’t have it tattoed on their forehead. And look pretty damn normal actually.
But FWIW, if a man has fantasies about young women dressed in school uniforms, and hires the youngest sex worker an agency has to roleplay a schoolgirl, I wouldn’t ask him to babysit, let’s put it that way. Yeah I know all the arguments about ‘role play’ I’ve heard them about 10 million times before at least.
Just gimme the facts eh? Instead of endless links.
The point I’m making, in case you’re confused – is that even if you have proof positive that Yvette Doll is someone with paedophile interests – which COULD be the case, if ‘Douglas’ is Douglas Fox, then he’s a paedophile apologist.
And two wrongs never make a right.
And Stephen/Anthony/Old Uncle Tom Cobley, whoever you are of course you’re not impartial. People who don’t have an axe to grind don’t randomly waste precious time arguing on the internetz. And why would you randomly happen across this blog.
Oh, I’m just soooo cynical – but my instincts are usually right actually, look at Mark Cowling.
And Stephen
It’s only worthwhile suing someone for libel if a) you’ve got pots of cash and b) the person you are suing has pots of cash.
Otherwise you just end up broke. But as far as I know Julie Bindel, the journalist and activist has not directly or indirectly caused anyone’s death. Unless you know differen of course?
Just gimme the facts as I say.
“Yvette Doll may well be someone with a paedophile past – you could be right Steven,”
That is just the Stephen P club ( it’s his blog?) having a bit of a pedophile smear campaign because they are losing the arguments.
We do have a film documentary of Douglsa Fox’s agency & a girl putting lubricrant and a schoolgirl’s uniform in her travel bag. That’s real.
John@CT
Administrator
Never Shuts Up
“My second point. Schoolgirl. A few years an agency had pictures of one of their girls in pyjama/short shirt type clothing pulling along a big teddy bear. I thought it was appalling. I was physically disgusted at it. WTF were they trying to attract. Those pics remained online for a good few months before being pulled. Should girls offering escorting scenarios such as “School Girl” be banned too.”
http://www.ct-escorts.co.uk/forum/index.php?PHPSESSID=6e9bfa3f5fa1bfba7c56d0fe43466123&topic=2085.0
John ( Fox’s partmer) knew it was wrong, the agency just wanted that teacher’s money.
‘John’s denial, though, was much more interesting: an odd hybrid of legalistic game-playing and genuine psychological resistance to the notion that he was selling sex. It wasn’t that he didn’t know perfectly well what was going on (otherwise why squirm so uncomfortably about the headmaster who rang up requesting the youngest escort on the books to dress up as a schoolgirl?)’
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_/ai_n16657627
“Should girls offering escorting scenarios such as “School Girl” be banned too.”
They are pimps and hypocrites! They were doing precisely that and doing it on TV!
Their sicko pro-prostitution friends are trying to smear decent people as pedophiles to frighten the critics away.
Yvette Doll
Breaking the record for serial posting if anyone still has the will to live;
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_/ai_n16657627
Christony Companions WAS contacted by a headmaster asking for the youngest worker dressed as a schoolgirl apparently. And Mr Fox’s business partner did not slam the phone down indignantly though he did ‘squirm uncomfortably”.
And yes it’s faux paedophilia. And I can’t imagine why anyone is repelled by the idea of paedophilia (which most non paedophiles are actually) would want to role play faux paedophilia.
And please don’t use the “It’s therapeutic’ argument because I might just go Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
That should have read ‘who is repelled by the idea of paedophilia’. not ‘is repelled’.
Sorry I haven’t read the 170 plus comments but I agree with Too Much to Say For Myself. As an active trade unionist, socialist and Marxist – as well as a feminist, I think Feminist Fightback have taken a “workerist” attitude to “sex work” particularly prostitution. In Marxist terms we have to ask what is the “prostitute” selling? Her labour? Her consent? Or her body?
Is the woman’s body the commodity that is being traded as opposed to her labour?
I call “Feminist Fightback” FIGHTBACK AGAINST FEMINISM! In the Scotttish Socialist Party our position is that prostitution is harmful to women, that is in the continuum of violence towards women and that the prostitute and prostitution should be decriminilised and the buyers of sex and those that prostitute women should be criminalise. We also support heroin on prescription.
There are some people in the party including members of Feminist Fightback who have argued that prostitution should be seen as work and the way to solve the issues of prostitution is through the trade union movement. However the trade union movement has fought for over thirty years nthat sexual harrassmen t is a work place issue – making a lairy comment to woman or pinch her bottom could see you in a disciplinary? What would be sexual harrassment for the shop steward for prostitutes or any worker in the sex industry?
Hope that is helpful.
Yes the ‘worms in the head’ are the exact same for ersatz pedophilia, it is a virtual form of offending with real people.
It is a themed child prostitution in Newcastle upon Tyne.
Yvette Doll
(The offending blog is owned by Anthony Kennerson who was doing a stalking tango on poor old Mr. Carlin, as if releasing all those Gary Glitter records wasn’t bad enough. Stephen P ( who imported the stinking venture here via a link) has his own pro-prostitution circus frency on a different web-site under is own banner. I just hope mr. Carlin doesn’tlose his job with the Vatican, it’s one allegation and you are out apparently these days)
http://stephenpaterson.wordpress.com/
Stephen P Says:
January 14, 2009 at 9:15 am
http://ajk-sdchron-sexposleftist.blogspot.com/2009/01/ahhhlookee-hereyvette-doll-exposed.html
Word Cat. Because the members I’ve met wouldn’t know a member of the working class if they bit them on the bum. They’re all middle class as middle class can be, and romanticise like crazy. They don’t seem to realise, for one, that Thatcher more or less destroyed trade unionism in this country, and that you don’t get ‘rights’ just by joining a union. I’m a public sector worker and there is about to be serious, serious shit about pay at our work and our unions can do fuck all about it we’re stuffed basically. And you can hardly take your local pimp to an employment tribunal – bee-have.
They’re fighting back against the bourgeois- themselves!
“FIGHTBACK AGAINST FEMINISM!”
They’re pimp groupies, which is like being pro-C18, wasn’t a UVF linked person at that demo (Ulster) they have a photograph of on their web-site?
The UVF sell drugs, operate brothels, and use to castrate Catholics. The latter being a torture killing phenomena, Shankill Butchers & etc.
I think the PUP were there.
Yvette
“They’re fighting back against the bourgeois- themselves!”
Baader Meinhof, chauffeur driven getaway cars! There is nothing worse than a middle class kid with an assault weapon and a mimeograph machine
I use to live in east Berlin, I use to give tunnel parties, bring your own spade, that was after becoming part of the school curriculum as an anti-imperialist artist.
I was not appreciated by the STASI until my views on the statesmanship of Erich Honecker became known to the authorities, Ididn’t think his photographers did him justice and I said so publicly.
So the STASI arrived one day, and told me I was not a dangerous homosexual, and that if there was anything they could do, & etc.
They designed a record album cover for me!
http://www.discogs.com/viewimages?release=250203
Something similar, Yvette Doll credit as well
Yvette
Also Cat (spot on with the Marxist analysis) my argument is:
Sex work must be the easiest thing to set up a business in, since you essentially don’t have much capital outlay (apart from schoolgirl outfits). So why would a union, or indeed a Marxist, encourage sex workers to work in a capitalist set up like Fox’s agency, instead of organising collectively without pimps?
Because then they would control the means of production.
Revolution!
Answer – because most of those in the unions don’t seem to be workers.
“So why would a union, or indeed a Marxist, encourage sex workers to work in a capitalist set up like Fox’s agency, instead of organising collectively without pimps?”
The trade unionists are the pimps, otherwise it would be a Kulak co-op.
Yvette
There are times when I wonder if the prohibitionists could take out insurance against having Yvette Doll in their midst, But no doubt somebody will say the same about the IUSW and Douglas…
I came here to discuss the merits of various philosophical and legislative approaches to the sex industry, not paedophilia or child porn. If people want to tak about paedophilia and child porn, why don’t they go away and write a blog about paedophilia and child porn, or find somebody else’s?
The post itself poses the question of the legitimacy of IUSW as a trade union given the prominent presence in it of somebody involved with an agency. Now my understanding – and I stress this is only MY understanding, there are certainly other approaches and I don’t ptretend to be definitive – is that the IUSW is not a trade union.
My understanding is that there is a London adult branch of the GMB, which obviously is a trade union, and that that branch decided on the title International Union of Sex Workers in order to achieve a more user friendly approach to the increasing number of migrant – not, please, trafficked, before anyone starts off on that tangent – sex workers in London, many of whom struggle with their English.
With various comings and goings to London by sex worekers over the years, however, the IUSW has actually evolved into an international network via the web, and has friends all over the world, way beyond the remit of the GMB, and has thus become a truly international pressure group for sex worker rights, which explains (Cath if you’re reading this) the degree of international interest in your posting.
Legally, however, my belief is that in trade union terms, the GMB branch still exists as a branch of the GMB in London and its certificate of independence is that of the GMB.
I am really not the best person to speak to on this, but this is my understanding of the distinction and of how it came about, and I stress again there are different versions.
“There are times when I wonder if the prohibitionists could take out insurance against having Yvette Doll in their midst, But no doubt somebody will say the same about the IUSW and Douglas…”
That’s rich
After you posting a link to a brazen pedophile smear against an innocent person to this blog? That is a typical pro-prostitution stunt.
Jacqui Smith is aware who iinitiated *all* the Jobcentre abuse investigations, including the child endangerment incidents, there are one or two things which have yet to go into the Daily Mail.
Schoolgirl fetish providers, are definitely out of favor with Jacqui Smith MP
I think you will find christony were on Jobcenttre
All the best
Yvette
YD’s consistent reference to specific fetishes are merely a reflection of her own sexual preferences. She’s got the infantile – ravish the little girl fetish thing going on. She just likes to be chased I think and needs that combative attention to get off. She reminds me of one of the time wasters who call all the time and ask if you have this or do that and then never makes an appointment.
“She reminds me of one of the time wasters who call all the time and ask if you have this or do that and then never makes an appointment.”
I’m making an appointment with Jacqui Smith. instead,
she’ll possibly end up offering to pay me I suspect ( for my important blogging) by yet another offer of grant aided nuisance suppression.
I always show up. .
Yvette
YD said: I always show up. .
Now your making me laugh.
Are you one of these closet wanna be ho’s? You know like Dan White, the murder of Harvey Milk was a closet case and all of his pent up internal unexpressed homophile urges turned rage and exploded at the one he admired, Harvey.
Do you drink?
“Word Cat. Because the members I’ve met wouldn’t know a member of the working class if they bit them on the bum. They’re all middle class as middle class can be, and romanticise like crazy.”
^^^as above^^^
except ive not met any feminist fightback members, ive read their stuff since before they were FF, and thats the only impression ive ever had.
Nobody seems to have answered my question about the fate of those trafficked for sex victims who only come to light as a result of the actions of clients if the Government proposals are successfully perpetrated.
Are the brothel managers or the traffickers going to come forward to the police to volunteer information? I hardly think so, as they’re already criminalised. So now we put the final nail in the coffin by criminalising the clients.
As in the cases cited here: http://stephenpaterson.wordpress.com/2009/01/03/why-smiths-new-plans-wont-work-criminalising-the-clients-part-1/
I suppose the trafficking victims will just have to wait for the off-chance of a raid, then?
In a just world, Jacqui Smith would be sentenced to life in a shared cell with ‘Yvette Doll’ and Julie Bindel.
Are people going to turn themselves into the police for trafficking and abusing women?
Bee-have Stephen P, what drugs are you on?
Ditto the clients. Are they going to shop their local gangstas – who know who they are to the cops? Can you cite me an example – with documentation – where a client has actually reported trafficking to the police in any case? Do you not think that maybe some clients of ‘sex workers’ get off on the idea that they are abusing women. Because that is what the women I know who’ve actually BEEN sex workers tell me was their experience.
Links and potted summary here please. I’m not going to your site.
Can you repeat the question as well please? FWIW, I think any trafficked woman should automatically be given indefinite leave to remain and as much support as necessary.
But presumably Stephen – there may be a number you can ring anonymously and pass on information? Or you could just ring the police and ask them to investigate your local brothel? Without saying you’re a client?
AFAIK, the only trafficked women found in the UK have been as a result of police raids.
So are you saying Stephen Paterson that we need to keep the highly unpredictable and often troublesome dinosaur because a couple of times of year its shit produces good manure?
LMAO lavalamp, LMAO.
Yup, the way paterson tells it, there are just gazillions of good-hearted johns who are just horrified that the woman is trafficked. Shame they don’t extend their good hearts to think that maybe, just maybe, that woman really don’t like having 15 or so strange penises per day shoved into them. No matter how much one may like sex, 15 johns per day would test the enthusiasm of the most dedicated
nymphoHappy Hooker(TM).So according to paterson, we should keep everything nice and legal for the johns to masturbate into (poor) women’s bodies, coz one day, one of the thousands might actually do the partially right thing and report a trafficked woman. What about the scores of local poor women left to their fate?
Christony did advertise in the Jobcentre, yes. As other ‘escort agencies’ have. Google “sweet dreams escort agency”. If I do two links, I’ll end up in mod.
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/866713.we_dont_sell_sex_for_a_living/
It’s curious Maxine and Stephen that you both think a headmaster asking for a very young girl dressed up as a schoolgirl is perfectly ok and he’s safe around kids. Yet you decide Yvette Doll is probably a paedophile on the basis of once being a business associate of a someone with paedophile convictions. Oh and you just ‘know’ with some magical power Maxine. Can you tell me next weeks lottery numbers in that case?
Yvette Doll may or may not be Gary Glitter himself for all I know. I don’t really care, I’m not proposing to become his/her new best friend. However your ad hominem attacks – which are nothing more than speculation – are obviously designed to detract from the topic at hand. As Mr Fox does when he accuses feminists of ‘lacking compassion’ for his poor, poor, disabled clients.
However the stuff about Douglas Fox – who claims to be a guardian of morality providing a vital service to lonely businessmen and people with disabilities, and lambasts feminists for ‘lacking compasssion’, is correct. I also believe that Yvette Doll has some in depth knowledge of the North East of England, where there are some very, very dodgy goings on indeed.
Anyway, the Happy Hookers are into it for themselves. They want to keep the poor women trapped in prostitution, that way the Happy Hookers don’t have to take on an extra 20-30 johns per day. *nice sisterhood*
There are NO acceptable losses in this game. All the women who want OUT of prostitution should be given the help to do so. But I reckon the Happy Hookers won’t be quite so happy when that happens.
Polly Styrene
Why don’t you go to my site? It’s only another WordPress blog, just like this one. It doesn’t cost you anything and it doesn’t bite.
If you think I’m going to run around uploading all the info from my blog, links and so forth here just to please you, think again. That’s why people have different blogs.
If you go to the blog you’ll find links to all the evidence you’re asking for of cases where punters’ tip-offs have caused the raids that rescued victims and put the traffickers behind bars, and of police seeking information from punters in another recent case.
Incidentally, if you get the Lilith Project’s weekly newsletter, they plaguiarised the Press & Journal account of one of the cases which had resulted from a punter’s tip off (to be fair, they credited the Press + Journal as source of the story).
They just happened to omit the detail that it was a punter’s tip off that led to the raid, though.
Surprise, surprise.
Word lavalamp. Brevity is the soul of wit.
A whole one case. So can you give me a link to the press and journal then Stevie? It’s bound to be on t’internetz.
You might have heard sometimes though about people called ‘grasses’. And the police usually give them immunity, if they provide information. Or like I say, you could have an anonymous phone line. In fact there already is one. It’s called Crimestoppers.
http://www.crimestoppers-uk.org/
That’s handy isn’t it.
However the real point of criminilisation Stevie, is to stop people doing things. So the idea is that the punters wouldn’t shop the brothel owners, because the punters would make sure they used independent workers, for fear of prosecution, so the brothel owners trade would die.
Which as a Marxist, I think is a good thing. The workers control the means of production.
Why won’t I go to your site Stephen? My mate went to a blogspot and ended up with a nasty virus which ruined her computer that’s why. Why won’t you post links here? Or just cut and paste the post. Are you that desperate for traffic.
Basically Stephen, I don’t trust you. That’s why.
And you don’t have to please me at all. But if you want to PROVE something.
Gimme the facts.
“Are you one of these closet wanna be ho’s? You know like Dan White, the murder of Harvey Milk was a closet case and all of his pent up internal unexpressed homophile urges turned rage and exploded at the one he admired, Harvey.
Do you drink?”
Harvey Milk was a political patron of the People’s Temple,
he doesn’t desere to be remembered for anything special, other than his lobbying for a crazy mass murderer.
Yvette
“Yet you decide Yvette Doll is probably a paedophile on the basis of once being a business associate of a someone with paedophile convictions.”
Mr. Carlin released records for Gary Glitter *before* the convictions.
I think you will find that Mr. Carlin doesn’t take money from pimps,pedophiles or pornographers.
According to the pro-Vatican media.
YD
nb to cut = select text then press CTRL + P
To paste CTRL + V
Microsoft is your friend.
And as I said YD, I’ve seen Gary Glitter play live.
Before the convictions.
So you’d probably better start implying I’m a paedophile as well Stephen and Maxine. because I write quite a lot about child abuse.
And FWIW Stephen, I’m not a prohibitionist. There is no point in criminalising independent sex workers because it’s not enforceable – I just want to get rid of pimps and exploiters. Douglas Fox represents himself in a certain way in public, which is very far from the truth. He says he provides sex workers to disabled men who can’t get sex (being very ableist of course) and busy businessmen. Not pervy headteachers.
And if there’s no point talking about paedophilia, why do you keep banging on about it and implying Yvette Doll is a paedophile?
Wow, you guys are REALLY frightened of discovering the police need the help of punters, cos the punters provide the info on where the trafficking vicxtims are, aren’t you?
You REALLY don’t like that one. Awkward ball, isn’t it, so let’s play the man, the website, anything you can but for God sake, not the ball.
Let’s explain that the idea of criminslising is to stop something happening, even though the last couple of hundred years of criminalising brothels and pimps has still left us with thousands of brothels etcetera, thank heavens, so we can go on and on and on criminalising and criminalising because THIS TIME we have a SOLUTION!
YES – we’ll CRIMINALISE THE GUYS WHO TELL THE COPS ABOUT THE TRAFFICKING VICTIMS!
Stupid of us, now why didn’t we think of that before?
“January 15, 2009 at 7:14 pm
And as I said YD, I’ve seen Gary Glitter play live.
Before the convictions.”
Most people thought he was a great bloke, a national treasure, until & etc.
I was at a benefit once for unemployed female imperonators, and I bumped into Mr. Carlin, I remenber thinking how outstandingly handsome he was,
and he told me, that one of the reasons he wanted to do Gary Glitter’s records, was because his Mom liked them.
So there you are
YD
“Wow, you guys are REALLY frightened of discovering the police need the help of punters, cos the punters provide the info on where the trafficking vicxtims are, aren’t you?”
In my tussles with Fiona MacTaggart, I think we found, that in relation to child victims, the punters in shining armour, had sex with them first,
That Crimestopper strategy was a disaster.
Gregory
We knew it ws going to lead todecriminalized child rape, with the rapistgetting a cup of tea and a thank you from the police, which is the way it worked out, we also had some of the Crimestopper campaigners organizing sex tourism to Cheb.
I shall be reminding the govt. how it went so badly wrong. I can probably post the original press relation if you have a policy re: Vatican media.
Some feminist blogs have policies re: the Vatican & etc. Except for Paglia of course, she was quite fond, of the scale of the Catholic thing, nice ceilings & paintings.
One anticipated it would go badly wrong.
Gregory Carlin
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/feb/06022305.html
Thursday February 23, 2006
See today’s LifeSiteNews stories
Send news tips
Ulster MLA Opposes Proposed “Amnesty” for Men Who Use Prostitutes
By Terry Vanderheyden
BELFAST, February 23, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A Member of the Northern Ireland Assembly is condemning a proposed amnesty by police for prostitution offenders. The measure would provide men who visit prostitutes amnesty from prosecution in exchange for information on women who were possible victims of sex trafficking.
Stephen, on one of the hundreds of links to punter sites, a punter says he will see only independent workers if the new law is brought in.
You haven’t supplied one link here – why is that so hard – to a reliable source that can back up what you say, (Your opinion is NOT a reliable source) or explained why the punters can’t ring Crimestoppers anonymously.
And if the law is not going to change anything, why are you bothered?
You’re avoiding the issue again.
And as YD points out – if the punters don’t have sex with a trafficked woman.
They haven’t committed a crime have they?
It’s you who can’t play the ball Stephen. And I really, really don’t trust you. Post the links here. Have you got RSI? You’ve posted endless long comments, but you can’t cut and paste your post?
You’ve not supplied one bit of proof punters DO tell cops about trafficking victims. And if they’re such nice guys. Why do they rape the trafficked women.
Just post the link and answer the question. Then I’ll tell you why you’re wrong.
AGAIN.
Murder keeps on happening Stephen.
Rape keeps on happening.
Child abuse keeps on happening.
Presumably your answer is to make them legal as well. They happen anyway…….
Well stephen, it’s been a blast, but you lost IMNSHO. Feel free to keep arguing with yourself, but I’m fed up of trolling Cath’s blog.
“Come back and fight”
“But you’ve got no arms”
Polly Styrene
Your inability to surf to any other site on the internet other than this one through your paranoia about viruses clearly means you would be unable to surf to any references anyway and explains a great about how you’ve grown up the way you have.
Why don’t you ask a grown-up?
For the last time, you can have all the references you want at this WordPress blog here:
If you can visit it, please do. If not, at least we’ll all know where on the web to find you.
“Come back and fight”
“But you’ve got no arms”
“Then I’ll bite you to death”
“Empirical evidence suggests trafficked women are far fewer in number than the Government cares to admit (more on this in a later blog). But clients (or ‘punters’) have a crucial role in locating those there are.”
Hundreds of females from England were tricked by agencies into working in Dundalk, or Limerick, that was outrageously irreponsible.
Sex industry links with Russian mafia prompted lap dance raids
‘As the Sunday Independent revealed last month, gardai suspect that one Lithuanian girl who had been working as a lap dancer in Limerick was gang-raped, abducted and murdered by members of the Russian mafia in April last.’
We still have missing females. Limerick was a butcher’s shop and going through very trying times, and to tell English girls that Dundalk was a ‘suburb’ of Dublin failed to convey the realities and risks of that border town.
So the response of the so-called legitimate agencies in England was to supply very dangerous people, with vulnerable young women from England, it was sex traffiking.
Lap-dancing lunacy
Bombs, guns and paedophile priests? Forget all that and target the strippers
One particular God-botherer from the Catholic far-Right in correspondence with the work permits agency has even threatened Tony Blair and blamed the Prime Minister personally for allowing Ireland’s shores to be polluted with this filth.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2002/nov/03/northernireland
My actual objection was to illegal permits being given to a wife-beating pedophile who had already been exposed as a serx-trafficker by the BBC in Dundalk.
Respectfully submitted
Gregory Carlin
Irish Anti-Traffing Coalition
Polly Styrene
I seen your blog
art to me was a tour bus in Vidor, Texas, art to me was asking the tour guide at the Alamo “who won”? In a nation of winners, it is good to see losing elevated,
Success in LA is being stuck in an elevator, the real art with a thrash metal band, is the girlfriends, putting on their nail varnish, in Missouri, or Illinois, and looking out the bus window and saying ‘look there’s a cow’
And sure enough, out the window, was a cow, & so, that’s creative, art.
I released albums by Din A Testbild, and was at Illuminted Records when they did Klaus Schulze, Gary Glitter did a 12″ there as well, before the American Phonograph releases.
“Are Kisses out of fashion” was the only love somg I ever wrote, all the other songs were about heroin, or prostitution.
Chinese Detective – Are Kisses Out of Fashion? – disco di Chinese … – [ Translate this page ]
Are Kisses Out of Fashion? Titolo, Are Kisses Out of Fashion? Artista, Chinese Detective. Etichetta, Tatra. Prezzo, € 18,50. Prezzi in altre valute …
http://www.ibs.it/disco/4025905912261/chinese-detective/are-kisses-out.html – 32k – Cached – Similar pages –
Chinese Detectives had a hit with it in Sweden or somewhere.
Yvette
Funny how yd takes the time to associate harvey milk with a mass murder and not dan white, the closet case murder of harvey. yd’s position associates her with the being a prostitute closet case and her constant references to violence in this blog raises concern about the levels of violence she’s capable of.
and polly, i didn’t say yd was pedophile , I don’t see how you how you got there. she’s a victim fetishist. She, and apparently you, get off on imagining how it is to work as prostitutes from the position of being a sex slave. Then you imagine what would make me happy or sad. Very odd position. Its seems like a form of entity possession when you occupy my space or that of someone you aren’t.
I was part of sexual liberation, I’m played on radio stations from from Vladivostok to Voskresensk, because I prosletyzed radical ideas, in a political environment which was difficult to say the least.
I have copies of some of Milk’s correspondence on behalf of the People’s Temple, he lobbied against the Stoens, John Stoen, the son of former Assistant District Attorney Timothy Stoen, was found poisoned in Jim Jones cabin.
Yvette Doll
On December 13, 1973, Jones was arrested and charged with soliciting a man for sex in a movie theater bathroom known for homosexual activity, in MacArthur Park in Los Angeles.[98] The man was an undercover Los Angeles Police Department vice officer. Jones is on record as later telling his followers that he was “the only true heterosexual”, but at least one account exists of his sexual abuse of a male member of his congregation in front of the followers, ostensibly to prove the man’s own homosexual tendencies.[98]
While Jones banned sex among Temple members outside of marriage, he himself voraciously engaged in sexual relations with both male and female Temple members.[99][100] Jones, however, claimed that he detested engaging in homosexual activity and did so only for the male temple adherents’ own good, purportedly to connect them symbolically with him (Jones).[99]
Reply to Cath Elliot’s ‘The Great IUSW Con’
Having been mentioned several times in Cath Elliot’s ‘The Great IUSW Con’, Feminist Fightback would like to reply to the accusations levelled at both the IUSW and Fightback’s support for sex workers’ rights. We have been saddened to read yet another abolitionist article which, rather than engage in thoughtful and honest debate, seeks to obscure the issues through factual inaccuracies and faulty logic.
Feminist Fightback supports the right of sex workers to organise amongst themselves to fight exploitation in the sex industry and transform the conditions under which they work. The International Union of Sex Workers is the only such organisation in the UK, as a result Fightback has supported this union and worked alongside it, just as it has a number of other trade unions on various different issues. Some of us have attended London IUSW meetings that are open to allies, while a few other Fightback members are themselves sex workers and members of the IUSW. Cath Elliot’s supposed ‘exposé’ hardly strikes us, then, as a piece of biting investigative journalism. We have no need of her advice to be careful of who we make alliances with for we are perfectly capable of investigating, analysing and making judgements about the political issues on which Feminist Fightback campaigns.
It is no secret that Douglas Fox, a male escort who also runs an agency, is a member of the IUSW. But Cath Elliot seems to think that by ‘uncovering’ this single fact she has discredited not only the entire union but also all arguments in favour of sex workers’ self organisation and decriminalisation. Through an absurd leap in logic Elliot moves from a discussion of Fox to conclude that the IUSW is ‘populated with pimps, agency owners and punters’. Unfortunately no other evidence for this is offered. Nor does Elliot offer any further arguments against sex workers’ right to unionise. In the absence of more sophisticated debate, we’d like to address Elliot’s accusations one by one.
It bears re-stating that because one member of the union runs an escort agency this does not mean that all members are ‘pimps’ and punters. In working with the IUSW we have met members in a variety of jobs in the sex industry including strippers, maids and men and women selling sex in brothels and working independently. Unlike other trade unions the IUSW finds itself in the position of seeking to organise workers who are effectively illegal, denied the right to work by laws which criminalise the conditions under which sex is sold. Decrimalisation is deemed a pre-condition to transforming working conditions and challenging the exploitation which takes place within the sex industry. For this reason union membership is open to others working for decriminalisation, including academics and researchers in this field.
Moreover, the GMB membership ensures confidentiality, for how else could a union seek to recruit illegal workers? It also seeks to challenge the fetishisation of ‘prostitution’ by actively recruiting from a variety of jobs within the sex industry, including, for example, security staff in strip clubs or receptionists in brothels. This is a common trade union approach – to organise all workers in a particular industry collectively rather than pick out a particular trade or role in isolation. (A comparison is the RMT union whose members include drivers, platform staff and cleaners on the London Underground.) We ask Cath Eliott what she would like the union to do? Demand that each individual out themselves? Specify exactly how much cock they suck, whether the do or do not do penetration in order to confirm for her whether they can truly be considered ‘authentic’ sex workers?
This concern for so-called authenticity is worrying. By implication it equates suffering with legitimacy. Does a woman who sells sex have to be addicted to drugs, working on the street and regularly beaten and raped in order to qualify to speak on behalf of sex workers? Can we not accept that a variety of experience exists in the sex industry? Can we not recognise that trade unionism is often about better off workers working alongside those experiencing the worst conditions, in order to improve the lives of all? In fact, we suggest that for Cath Elliot and other opponents of sex workers’ rights, the only ‘authentic’ sex worker is the sex worker who agrees with them.
Since Cath Elliot raised the issue of who, as feminists, we make alliances with, we would like to question the company she keeps by supporting the proposed government legislation to further criminalise sex work. The Policing and Crime Bill proposes to convict clients buying sex from anyone who is ‘controlled for gain’, strengthens police and local government powers to close down brothels, and further criminalises women working on the streets. (See the Safety First Coalition website for why this will make conditions more dangerous for sex workers). This legislation has been vocally supported by Cabinet ministers Harriet Harman and Jacqui Smith, politicians who Feminist Fightback would likewise urge Cath Elliot to think twice about allying herself with. Among the numerous attacks on working-class women that these supposed champions of women’s rights have voted through include Harman’s drastic cuts to single parent benefit in 1997 and Jacqui Smith’s support for a draconian immigration system which regularly deports women who have been the victims of sexual violence back to the very countries from which they have fled. If Cath Elliot wants to purge the feminist movement of women’s real enemies then she might do well to start with Smith and Harman.
Finally, we would like to raise the wider question of why so many wish to block open debate on the subject of sex work – be this through refusing to speak on platforms where the voices of those they disagree with will be heard, through misinformed smear campaigns against sex workers’ organisations, or through mythologising and false claims regarding trafficking (for the government’s almost total lack of actual information on sex trafficking see here). Why does such a fundamentalist attitude persist around feminist responses to sex work? Why can we not think through the complex issues? Why can we not try to deal with the messy reality of the situation rather than resort to myth-making and scare mongering?
Those who want to decide whether they support the IUSW can find out what this union is and stands for for themselves – by reading IUSW materials and website, talking to the GMB or listening to IUSW representatives when they speak at events. We in Feminist Fightback continue to discuss and debate with each other what we think about the multifaceted issue of sex work, We do not claim to agree with every individual member of the IUSW, any more than we agree with all the policies of the other trade unions whose members we work with. We do, however, believe that anyone who is serious about fighting violence and exploitation in the sex industry needs to side with the workers organising within it, rather than seeking to criminalise or deny such workers a voice.
Dear Feminist Fightback
I was a whore to fate, ego, to ‘manufactured gender’, and the ‘decline of the west’ before I was 17 years old, and I grew more manipulative with the passing years,
I arrived late at the doors of feminism because feminism didn’t have any guns and a philosophy without guns was taking the scenic route to anywhere important.
Cath unmasked me as a refugee from the factory, a Warhol groupie, I have stood in the same room as people who would have ‘nothing’ on the gallery wall and call it art, and make it so.
when I was asked by the Soviet Union to put a value, on their classical back catalog, they’d didn’t ask me to price it out in cabbage, or Marxist-Leninist polemic,
the Boshoi Ballet was like a South African diamond mine, it was precious, to be protected, rationed and made safe from the arteries of commerce delivering it to London, New York or Paris.
The same ideology which butchered the family of the Tsar, had developed its own ideas of ‘dignity’ and ‘appropropiateness’, it was the Russian mafia that would give Moscow its first strip clubs, until that happened, the Soviets wanted their revolution to be as spendidly ‘Roman’ as the workers could make it
The squalid killings at Ekaterinburg were carried out by the Bolshevik version of pimps.
“We have been saddened to read yet another abolitionist article which, rather than engage in thoughtful and honest debate, seeks to obscure the issues through factual inaccuracies and faulty logic.”
In east Berlin faulty logic was bollock naked in a disused barrack shower for a couple of days as they debated which clinic you were going to. What building were the pro-pimps standing in front of?
Spearmint Rhino was using schoolgirls in Brirmingham and in London they were associated with visa irregularities and prostitution, So the question is whether so things are good or bad.
“Feminist Fightback supports the right of sex workers to organise amongst themselves to fight exploitation in the sex industry and transform the conditions under which they work. ”
So Dachau should have a few magazines in the waiting room, a mini-golf course and a couple of SS assigned to deal with complaints about the DJ? Marcus Aurelius. Of each particular thing ask: what is it in itself? What is its nature?
“It is no secret that Douglas Fox, a male escort who also runs an agency, is a member of the IUSW. But Cath Elliot seems to think that by ‘uncovering’ this single fact she has discredited not only the entire union but also all arguments in favour of sex workers’ self organisation and decriminalisation. ”
Jacqui Smith MP will treat any petition ‘or idea’ from Douglas Fox or the IUSW, as if it was shit. If you’d researched the issue as well as you think you have, you would know why, I can give you some advice, Douglas Fox, is not a personality the credible want to be in the same room as.
“Elliot moves from a discussion of Fox to conclude that the IUSW is ‘populated with pimps, agency owners and punters’. ”
Regardless hw she arrived at that position, it just happens to be true, and represents a dent in your self-fabled research.
“Moreover, the GMB membership ensures confidentiality, for how else could a union seek to recruit illegal workers? It also seeks to challenge the fetishisation of ‘prostitution’ by actively recruiting from a variety of jobs within the sex industry, including, for example, security staff in strip clubs or receptionists in brothels. ”
So FF is taking a stand against commercially fetished pedophilia avec schoolgirls or the ‘youngest girl onthe books’?
The Russian mafia, the GTA pimps in Canada, the gangsters in Dublin, and Limerick, they all like ‘owning’ door security, ex-policemen, what you are describing is organized crime which is done well.
“We do, however, believe that anyone who is serious about fighting violence and exploitation in the sex industry needs to side with the workers organising within it, rather than seeking to criminalise or deny such workers a voice.”
They do have a voice by the diktat of your agenda, and it is the voice of pimps.
Yvette Doll
In response to feminist fightback:
Cath Elliott pointed out that the IUSW is unique among ‘trade unions’ in that.
It allows business owners to join the same union as ‘workers’
It allows ‘friends and allies’ to join. – hence the reference to punters.
Both of these facts can be verified by reference to the IUSW’s owne website.
And it has less than 100 members overall. The estimated number of sex workers engaged in selling sex as opposed lap dancing etc in the Uk is 80,000. This is, it must be stressed not a verified figure in any way. It was arrived at by a researcher by multiplying the average number of clients of 20 projects working with sex workers by the total number of projects overall. Therefore it is a very rough estimate. The figure could be higher or lower than that.
However I think we can all agree that there are far more than 100 sex workers (directly selling sex) in the Uk. How therefore can the IUSW claim to ‘represent sex workers’. If there was a trade union of 100 members representing a workforce of say 10,000 people it would be treated with derision.
The activities in sex work that would entitle a person to membership of the IUSW are NOT all illegal, contrary to what feminist fightback state. Working on a phone sex line is not illegal. Being a lapdancer is not illegal. Selling sex itself is NOT illegal. Therefore illegality is not what is deterring people from joining the IUSW.
In many media outlets (for example comment is Free in the Guardian) and on the F word, Douglas Fox completely fails to mention that he is in fact an escort agency owner and describes himself as an ‘independent sex worker’.
Con? I think so.
Re Feminist Fightback/Education Not For Sale/Alliance for Workers Liberty/etc: If I had the cash and the spare time I could set up a half dozen groups with different names pretending to be allies pursuing the same goals, when they were really all just me. But it seems dishonest, does it not?
So basically the IUSW are not sex worker advocates but are sex work and sex industry advocates.
Non sex workers and ex prostitutes have been taking license for decades to front for the interests of the prostitute nation using justification like the ‘advocate’ voice which is clearly not the workers’ voice.
The advocates do not equate into being allies for sex workers. There’s a big difference.
We’ve seen many of those ‘advocates’ usurp the workers voice. I can think of a dozen examples where ‘advocates’ have actively suppress the workers voices so that ‘advocates’ can get what they really want, which is to get paid to represent interests that of which, they’ve not been asked by actual currently working sex industry workers to do on our behalf. They never have our permission.
And the trafficking discourse is another way the poverty pimps get paid to usurp the voice of actual victims of force, fraud and coercion, regardless of which industry it occurs.
And imposing your arbitrary ratio of representation is just another way you act in the capacity of the boss of prostitutes and use your self appointed position to bar our right to organize opposition to our right to work in whatever capacity we work in.
We believe in industrial organizing! Prostitutes, indoor, streetbased, parlor, agency, outcall/incall, exotic dancers, phone sex operators, webcam performers, porn actors, pro doms/subs. Anyone who eans a living from their erotic labor. And all of our support staff: that would be agents, phone help, receptionist, janitors, drivers, security,
Of which Douglas falls into several categories above, as do many sex industry workers.
The opposition to prostitution and sex workers’ rights have no idea how the industry really works. In many cases, actual sex industry workers have no idea their economy and who shares it and opposition to sex worker rights and in some cases the ‘advocates’ have taken action to avoid associations to make sure that we never know. The opposition has always relied on creating demonic stereo types to discredit our own voices in the public’s eyes thereby creating the poverty and they you profit off of it with your ‘advocacy’.
DF and the IUSW is representing my interests even though I am not a member of their union, even though I’m not citizen of the UK, as I maintain my right to work anywhere on the planet in any capacity I see fit.
shorter maxine – “once we’ve finished using you we’ll silence you”
because nothing is as horrifying to a pimp as the woman who has escaped them finding space to tell her side of the story.
DF and the IUSW is representing my interests even though I am not a member of their union, even though I’m not citizen of the UK, as I maintain my right to work anywhere on the planet in any capacity I see fit.
The ‘Global Market’ doesn’t extend or indeed work to this level. Non of us are guaranteed a ‘right’ that our work experience or qualifications are transferable on a global scale.
mine are.
# v Says:
January 21, 2009 at 11:11 pm
shorter maxine – “once we’ve finished using you we’ll silence you”
because nothing is as horrifying to a pimp as the woman who has escaped them finding space to tell her side of the story.
What? And this would not be you, would it?
It’s just like a boss to pit the interests of the wokers against the object of your poverty pimp.
As a swedish sexworker and activist I’m really amazed that people have the time and energy to sit around making up conspiracy-theories about abusers and pimps infiltrating sexwork activism and unions. From where I stand I’ll say, infiltrate away, god knows we need all the support we can get. And yes I am a REAL sexworker (whatever that is), and no, here in Sweden we are by no means more protected against any form of violence or abuse because of the stupid law that criminalises clients. There you can really talk of abusing and using sexworkers.
There are many female politicians in Sweden whom made a career on this law, all in the name of “feminism” and “stop violence against women”. Ask me how many sexworkers they are willing to discuss feminism and workers rights with? A big, fat zero as long as you don’t identify as a victim. Then I prefer the political support from a pimp or a client anytime. But wait, I also run a strip-club in Stockholm, does that make me a pimp? Sorry, no, it’s run as a collective and we split all the money.
Nothing in the world is black and white, including the sexindustry and the people within it. Want to protect sexworkers human rights? Then maybe it would be wise to listen to people that has some personal experience, including agents (oooops, sorry, pimps) and clients. Just beacuse they buy or organize a service doesn’t automatically make them idiots, they might acually give a damn. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar, and workers rights are for everybody, however uncomfortable the industry makes you feel.
Pye
What can I say we are paranoid.
I even imagined encountering very dangerous gangsters from Limerick, Amsterdam and Spain in the Baltic countries.
It is B & W as far as I am concerned.
Gregory Carlin
Irish Anti-TRafficking Coalition, Belfast, Northern Ireland
[DOC] MEMORANDUM
File Format: Microsoft Word – View as HTML
EC/IOM Project “Action-Oriented Research on Infiltration by Trafficking Networks Into organisations Working to combat trafficking/ With Victims of …
http://www.belgium.iom.int/document/ Hippokrates%20Report%204th%20NGM%20Internet.doc – Similar pages
Pye Jakobson Says:
January 22, 2009 at 4:21 am .
There are many female politicians in Sweden whom made a career on this law, all in the name of “feminism” and “stop violence against women”.
Talk about profiting off the criminalization of our labor!
Maxine
A country can make many things illegal, there is no general right to drive a car, own a gun, smoke where you want & etc.
In relation to Doglas Fox and the IUSW, they are are a coalition of pimps and fellow travellers.
I know Jacqui Smith is far more likely to be abducted by aliens than to meet Douglas Fox.
Gregory
Not posting as your alter-ego ‘Yvette Doll’ today, Mr Carlin?
Gregrory et all,
The right to one’s bodily freedom is an inherit, human right. The right to walk the streets for what ever reason with the expectation of not being subjected to any violence, (including but not limited to the not being subjected to the violence of arrest prostitution), is an inherent human right. The right to say yes and the right to say no is an inherent human right. The right to negotiate for our erotic labor and the condition under which we decided it will occur is our inherent human, civil and labor right.
Do you not agree?
“Not posting as your alter-ego ‘Yvette Doll’ today, Mr Carlin?”
If you don’t understand that split city, that Berlin thing, then you are not going to understand why DDR beer tasted better. I got the office in Covent Garden, and Yvette got the B & W version of Berlin. It was a change from Haight Asbury.
“The right to walk the streets for what ever reason with the expectation of not being subjected to any violence, (including but not limited to the not being subjected to the violence of arrest prostitution), is an inherent human right.”
Schoolgirls can’t walk about Soho can they? That’s real schoolgirls by the way.
Gregory
I think Redcar is getting a visit, about child sex trafficking.
That is Vera Baird’s home turf. It is a follow-up to the PtP thing. I think the last visit had 3,000 pedophiles, tracked by the forces of light and they were all in the NE area, is that a dangerous place or what?
It is not exactly that far from the global centre of
“For lots of women, the lure of easy money must be strong and when John placed an advert in a Jobcentre, this struck him forcefully. “Within a seven day period we had 4,000 applications – everything from a 68-year-old housewife to a priest,”‘
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/866713.we_dont_sell_sex_for_a_living/
Priests asking to be prostitutes.
Yvette
people in glass houses should’nt throw stones!
the prohibition lobby has anti-abortionists and homophobes in its midst,strange bedfellows indeed!
the iraq war has led to forced prostitution,does the anti-prostitution gang care? of course not,who voted for the iraq war?
harriet harman et al
there has always been a dispensation in Christendom for the Jew with money, or the aesthete. Without gay people, the paint would be peeling off many a work of art,
In Belfast for example it was the gays encouraged by Amnesty who targeted the Catholics. Catholics supported the gays being given free money, but they were expected to behave themselves.
If we won’t tolerate the Orange Order with an effigy of the Pope, why tolerate baiting parades by any anti-Catholic groupings? When in Rome, learn how to behave.
As it happens, gay brothels I simply had to ignore, until Douglas Fox that is, now with Amnesty off my back, I’m closing the entire heap in Ireland.
It was reverse homophobia, they had completely free pass from anti-prostitution activism.
They’ve lost that for good and they can thank Douglas Fox. The IUSW goal of consultative status with Jacqui Smith MP was also gainsayed by Douglas Fox.
He wasn’t much use was he?
Gregory
“The same document also clearly asks that member states understand the difference between coercive pimping and consensual management of sex businesses where sex workers freely choose to operate from for reasons of security and mutual support. ”
He got past Amnesty’s pimp radar,
and they’ve lost much of their rep for baiting Cardinal Pujats, about Riga. Which when the truth emerged had the pro-gays with gun enabled private ‘guards’, paramilitary gays!
I don’t think Amnesty planned on that news reaching the west.
And then…. it turns out they had a pimp as a mover and shaker of motions, and resolutions.
“the difference between coercive pimping and consensual management”
And a wee bit of a self-interest profit wagon, Amnesty were *hugely* damaged by Douglas Fox.
AIUK had a pimp as a delegate!
Thanks for the nice post.
Any idea why the “legalization” argument has been taken up by those who have a sincere interest in women’s rights? I’m not talking about brotel-owners joining the IUSW, I’m talking about people who tell me that “real feminists know that the best thing for prostitutes is being regulated.”
My Dad, of course, could tell me that it’s because “the liberals are always going to try to find a new way to be shocking,” but I’m looking for a more complicated answer. (There is a more complicated answer, right?)
I am very curious to see the C4 DOC ‘ The Escort Agency’ from 2006, would anybody know when i can find it online,or point me in the right direction of getting hold of a copy??
Many thanks,
Roxy Red
`this is brilliant, thanks. Stella Marr also wrote a lot about the same issues in the states http://survivorsconnect.wordpress.com/2012/06/29/part-2-more-pimps-posing-as-sexworker-activists/
There were two ‘campaigns’ in Dublin too, both organised by the convicted pimp owners and previous owners of escort-ireland. Sad stuff.
Oh and I meant to say to Stephen that the reason rape has ‘gone up’ in Sweden has nothing to do with prostitution. Obviously. It is because they widened the legal definition of rape to include sexual assault, molestation, child abuse etc. So that’s why. And even if this was not the case your point is just your ill informed stupid opinion. Rape happens because rapists rape. Not because of ANY OTHER FACTOR. OKAY?
Brilliant and well-researched piece
The IUSW allied to GMB officer Cat Stephens is now the president of Islington TUC as well as the holder of several Labour party positions in Islington North. She has lobbied extensively amongst the blue collar punters Cllrs and MP to promote their #pledgedecrim agendas. A large number of women who work locally in low paid public sector jobs ate now experts in telesex as a side ‘job’. As the Council is run by men and GMB councillors and where there exists an outlet for ‘massage services’ for members I cannot see this going away. The TUC is poorly attended and UNISON does not even bother having a say. The unions are run by men. I blame the SWP infiltration of UNISON and its evident support of decriminalisation. Cat Stephens of the IUSW is the womens officer. LGBT officer , vice chair of the executive of the Local Campaign Forum and now president of Islington TUC is a formidable quick operator. So much for the so callef ‘left’ taking leadership and control.