Distrubing Agressive Trend Towards Sex Worker Rights Activists

Posted by February 18, 2013

Disturbing treatment of sex worker rights activist

 

I received a call this morning from one such activist who is being harassed in email by one of those nut cases who thinks that sex workers ought to be arrested because she’d rather like to rescue us and get paid to do it. I know it doesn’t make any sense to me either that these types aren’t demanding an end to criminalization firstly and foremost as a means to stop the police from exploiting us.

 

Then I read this very good interview of Melissa Gira Grant where she accounts recent harassment. Waging War On Sex Workers by Zoe Schlanger interviews Melissa Gira Grant February 15, 2013 http://www.guernicamag.com/interviews/the-war-on-sex-workers/

 

 

And too this documented account of harassment from Feminist Whore on twitter.  http://feministwhore.wordpress.com/2013/02/16/examining-the-murphy-method/

 

 

Its really concerning that the haters cannot even tolerate others exercise of their right to free speech to express their opinions that are different from their shame-based sex-negative perspectives.

 

This new round of intimidation by these prostitution rights haters is important to document for ourselves. Its important share with our community members who are targets of this type of violence that we are not alone.

 

It’s important too to reach out to other groups for support when we’ve been attacked and I for one would really like to hear how those who say they’re for stopping violence against women, like the One Billion Rising people, say they oppose violence against us prostitution rights activists also.

 

I attended their events this past week as I was invited at the last minute by a friend.  http://www.facebook.com/events/337059453076068/

 

The event I attended was held at a large church with the female clergy welcoming the packed house. The drumming, the dancing, and singing was impressive but calling out violence in a general way wasn’t that useful to me as marginalized worker.  I have a question in my mind about how these types of women view prostitutes and prostitutes rights activists like myself. Is the violence of being criminalized included in their public condemnation of violence against women? Or is it feminist business as usual violating me with their imposed victomology and indifference?  The feminist, of 1973 decided that our rights were not to  be included or considered in their broad demand for equality for all women. Their position has yet to be officially rescinded, apologized and proper restitution made. And these steps are in order in my mind to move forward in solidarity.

Elitist Gloria Steinem signed an ballot argument against San Francisco Ballot Measure Proposition K that would have forced the city to stop arresting prostitutes. Why would so called feminist oppose stopping violence of arresting people for prostitution?

 

I would like to see a specific public statement to include respect specifically for our rights and for our activists.

 

 

Comments Off on Distrubing Agressive Trend Towards Sex Worker Rights Activists

Lessons On Legalization From Copenhagen

Posted by

 

Lessons On Legalization From Copenhagen

 

 

 Opinion | Inhumane and illogical treatment of us sex workers

Susanne Møller

February 17, 2013 – 07:00

http://cphpost.dk/commentary/opinion/opinion-inhumane-and-illogical-treatment-us-sex-workers

 

 

The above opinion piece written from a sex worker perspective which is to live under the oppressive and ineffective legalization of prostitution scheme imposed on them in 1999, offers specific directions of change from an actual worker prospective.

 

Its always best to hear from actual workers whose dignity is being impacted by laws that are sold to the public in the name of  ‘public decency’.

 

The author states: ‘….we’re not allowed to enter into binding contracts. This is a major hindrance that would help alleviate many of the practical problems that instead wind up turning into cases of human trafficking. Such is often the case with many foreign sex workers. They get help to come to Denmark, and then once they get here they wind up disagreeing with their handlers about what the deal was.’

 

This statement is instructive as to what prostitutes actually want.

The prostitutes who work in Denmark want to hire support staff and have the contracts between them be binding.  That means the contracts between workers/workers and/or support staff, or handlers as she calls them, has to be in writing and has to be enforced.

 

Every organized worker understands that having a contract, collectively bargained or not, is one thing but having it enforced is another.  Your contract is only as good as your ability to enforce it on your job and all erotic laborers ought to have both the backing of public and government support when enforcing the contracts on their job.  If we’re ripped off by a customer or support person, then we must have recourse the likes of which we see in Germany’s legalization of prostitution law passed in 2002 whereby prospective customers who make appointments and don’t show up can be made to hand over the money for the lost wages in court.

 

But going to court involves going public and in this case going public to get restitution risks being exposed publically as a prostitute and that would bring unintended consequences of being harassed, extorted, a target for violence, and discrimination.  Because our class of worker, across the globe, has suffered such negative stigma for so long, its important that access to legal protections be indentured in all legalization schemes.  Specific anti-discrimination laws for our class have to be enacted whereby workers and our larger community members who are in association with us can pursue contact enforcement, a form of equal protection laws, without the fear of loosing our housing, employment, education, nor threaten our child custody arrangements or other financial relationships.  Our privacy has to be respected.  Our personal and professional privacy has to be highly regarded as society value that comes with civil and criminal sanctions if violated.

 

And for those who are obsessed with exploitation in our industry, this is your opportunity to take note of how these demand from actual workers would empower all on a whole different level.  Having different kinds of incentives to leverage mutually beneficial contracts to help all parties fulfill their contract instead of focusing unduly on criminalizing one party so heavily as to completely disenfranchise the other disadvantaged party from engaging in a grievance process would open up new self- determined options and transparency, a public treasure.

 

To those of us who’ve worked in the sex industry for so many years with ‘gentle women’s agreements’ would do well to think about what it would be like to actually write down our agreements as to empower our class in a whole different way.

 

I know that if the public could see our verbal contracts in writing and how it is that we’ve been working together all these decades, they’d have to stop with their moral panic and instead have to start paying attention to their own exploitive work contracts and work conditions.

Comments Off on Lessons On Legalization From Copenhagen

Irish Consider Another Failed Policy

Posted by

Its appalling that Irish labor organizations have signed on to “Turn Off the Red Light” campaign as its clearly an unfair business practice against prostitutes.

 

You don’t see Irish prostitutes calling for the criminalization of your labor and of your economy as  a means to end exploitation on your jobs do you?

No of course not because that would silly and ineffective and nobody would consider that a viable approach.

 

Shame on You!

 

 

http://www.labouryouth.ie/

youth@labour.ie

 

http://www.labour.ie/

info@labour.ie

 

http://www.ictu.ie/

congress@ictu.ie

 

http://www.impact.ie/

Comments Off on Irish Consider Another Failed Policy

What Did You Do Today For The Cause?

Posted by February 14, 2013

I know that there are many of us across the globe who work tirelessly and unpaid on our respective projects to bring peace to the prostitute nation.

 

Here’s what I did today:

 

I spent 30  minutes talking with another sex worker rights activist, actually we wrestled about the next right action,

 

Then I spent 45 minutes on the phone talking to a worker about her case,

 

Then I spent another hour and 10 minutes on the phone with another worker about her frustration and her next right action.

 

I called and emailed  three orgs asking for their support.

 

I emailed 17 sex worker activists about an up coming action.

 

I texted with a sex worker rights activist in another state about  supporting their efforts.

 

Texted with another sex worker rights activist in yet another state about gaining a contact to help with our direct action.

 

I friended that ally and we set up a date to speak on the phone.

 

I posted on link on fb about how the anti prostitutist are really quite violent towards our class.

 

I called a researcher-left a message.

 

Last night I spent about an hour and 20 minutes exchanging information and supporting an other sex worker rights activist in Europe,

 

Before that, I spent two hours in a meeting with like minded activist on other issues not directly related to my industry.  I guess I would call that coalition building.

 

Before that meeting, I had a ten minute conversation with a political organizer about prop 35.

 

Before that, I had tea with a retired labor organizer about getting some help with our bylaws, that took about an hour.

 

Before that, I met with our customer plaintiff and recorded him-35  minutes.  I was late because my bus was late.

 

Before that, I emailed and called several legislators to ask for their support for anti discrimination legislation.

 

And I cannot remember what I did before that…

 

I’m not bragging, Im just saying…

 

I’m saying I enjoy my work, but its all unpaid.

 

I’d like to be supported in my work and get at least one other person resourced in joining me.

 

 

 

Comments Off on What Did You Do Today For The Cause?

Thanks James or John or whatever- But No Thanks

Posted by February 11, 2013

Thank James or John or whatever- But No Thanks

 

It pains me to no end  to read a rare op-ed supporting prostitutes’ right only hear the usual neo liberal dribble that passes for support of our right to negotiate for our own labor and work conditions.

 

http://www.mndaily.com/2013/02/11/prostitution-should-be-legal#.URkviGNWVz4.facebook

Prostitution should be legal

Laws criminalizing adult prostitution need to be re-examined.

By James Castle  February 11, 2013

 

Yes prostitution laws need to be examined and it would be good to ask those of us who’ve been on the front of lines working as prostitutes and the prostitutes rights movement what we think.

 

But since you didn’t ask, I’m going to tell you anyway because you need to have your archaic ideas that legalization equals enfranchisement abolished.

 

Its interesting that you look to Australia for justification for legalizing my profession as a means to expose better work conditions and end stigma for me and my kind.  If you’d bother to read any of the blogs or become informed by actual Australian prostitutes or sex workers as they call themselves, you’d understand that 20 years of decriminalization and legalization hasn’t ended the negative stigma against our class there so why do you think buying a licenses to work as a prostitute will end bad work conditions and end stigma here?

Being made to buy a license for the right to work won’t be a welcome news to many of us because we  don’t necessarily want to expose our work conditions because many of us work from our homes, we work in tandem with other workers, we hire reception help and security drivers and we don’t want have our situations disrupted by  exposing us to our neighbors and city fathers who’d rather see us zoned out of sight without regard  for our health and safety.  One has only to look to what legalization of abortion has done to American women’s reproductive options are now 40 years after Roe v Wade where that service is only legal and ‘safe’ in 17 states.

Too its contradictory  that buying a licenses for the right to work would be affordable for the likes of us who you’ve described as ‘…indigent’  and unable to ‘consent to being prostitutes;’  because we’re all ‘..coerced into prostitution in order to escape economic detriment…’.  Well if this is true then how are we expected to afford to buy  licenses of  any sorts to gain access to the right to work?

It seems you really haven’t thought this threw very well.  Why don’t you call me and we can talk.

 

Comments Off on Thanks James or John or whatever- But No Thanks

Feminist as Plantation Owner

Posted by February 7, 2013

In response to this ambivalence feminist’s quibbling about decriminalizing of my occupation.

Supporting Sex Workers’ Rights, Opposing the Buying of Sex

By Jill on 2.6.2013

Criminalizing prostitution is a form of sexual colonizations!
Too your thinking is flawed when you  correlate prostitute’s labor and with a wal mart worker’s labor.
Its not illegal to be a wal mart worker.  There are no wal mart worker sting operations to arrest wal mart workers for working as retail workers at wal mart.
We are not advocating to criminalize wal mart workers as a means to end exploitation on their job but feminist like you are in fact advocating directly to keep prostitution criminalized as a means to end exploitation on our job because YOU cannot figure it how to regulate my occupation without my permission in a way that doesn’t bother you.  I’d say-YOU are the plantation owner.

Comments Off on Feminist as Plantation Owner

The Good News and the Bad News About The NM Ruling

Posted by February 6, 2013
  • The good news about this ruling from New Mexico Supreme Court is that these two website owners will go free and not have to suffer going to jail for prostitution which ought not be criminal.
  • The bad news is that it lets the majority of the adult prostitution websites  that  mainly female providers use for advertizing are owned  primarily by male customers  to go unchecked.  Its a problem for us female providers that we are not in control of our own image and advertizing.  Due to the criminalization of our first amendment rights to free speech, we don’t have the right to negotiate for our own labor and safe work conditions.  And since male customers have more access to all kinds of resources like financial backing and technology, they’ve managed to take complete control of all the websites we rely on to advertize and thereby dominate our economy.
  • These websites dictate the terms of our speech by allowing or disallowing us to advertize ourselves as providing the kinds of services we prefer and who we prefer see as clients or not as well as what kinds of rates we charge.  This violates our principals of having the right to refuse service-the right to say no.  These websites attract and support groups of male customers who coordinate the review system of our mainly female service providers by which they threaten us with bad reviews to force us to provide the kinds of services they want at the rates they want.  Or they write fake reviews to blacklist us from being able to get any work at all.
  • The solution is to decriminalize prostitution so that we can tell the truth about who we are so as to restore our right to say yes in the kinds of services we provide as a protected right.  Too customers must be able to tell the truth about what kinds of service they’d like and have that respected as protected right too.
  • But male customers must be barred from dominating our work; we must ban male customers from being in charge our advertizing on any terms in any capacity.

  • NM high court issues setback in prostitution case

    By RUSSELL CONTRERAS, Associated Press
    Updated 1:10 pm, Wednesday, February 6, 2013
    Robert Gorence, attorney for former University of New Mexico president F. Chris Garcia, talks to reporters outside the New Mexico Supreme Court chambers in Santa Fe, Wednesday Feb. 6, 2013. The state’s high court denied Wednesday prosecutors’ requests to overturn a lower court’s ruling that nothing in state law made a website linked to Garcia and retired Fairleigh Dickinson University physics professor David C. Flory illegal. Prosecutors said the website was promoting prostitution. Photo: Russell Contreras

SANTA FE, N.M. (AP) — The New Mexico Supreme Court dealt a blow Wednesday to the prosecution’s case against two aging college professors accused of helping run an online prostitution ring, and denied a request to overturn a lower court’s ruling that nothing in state law made the website illegal.

The state’s high court ruled without comment to deny a request by the Bernalillo County District Attorney’s office to allow them to continue with a case that has drawn national attention and highlighted what some online experts say are New Mexico’s outdated anti-prostitution laws.

A state judge in June ruled that the website “Southwest Companions” — which was linked to former University of New Mexico president F. Chris Garcia and retired Fairleigh Dickinson University physics professor David C. Flory — violated no laws.

Both were arrested by Albuquerque police in June 2011 on charges of promoting prostitution after a yearlong police investigation into an alleged multistate operation where prostitutes and patrons could meet.

But District Judge Stan Whitaker found that an online message board could not be a house of prostitution under state law.

Prosecutors then took the functional equivalent of an appeal — an extraordinary writ — to the New Mexico Supreme Court. They said Whitaker had exceeded his authority in requiring the grand jury to be informed of the ruling, and they said his decision relied on facts not in evidence.

During arguments Wednesday, Michael Fricke, deputy district attorney for Bernalillo County, said he believed that the Internet “was a place” and therefore the website and its owners could be prosecuted under the state’s narrowly defined anti-prostitution laws.

Attorneys Teri Duncan, who represents Flory, countered that the state laws were clear and that the website didn’t fall into that category.

“Looking at the language of the statute, it’s clear that the place of prosecution … is intended to be a physical place,” she said.

New Mexico Supreme Court Judge Richard Bosson hinted that he agreed.

“The Legislature hasn’t looked at this in 30 years,” he said. “Maybe they should.”

State lawmakers are considering a proposal that could strengthen state law to include online prostitution websites.

Experts said that decades-old laws in New Mexico and other states make it difficult for authorities and prosecutors to go after prostitution-linked websites because the laws don’t necessarily outlaw the practice in cyberspace.

Fricke said prosecutors will reevaluate the case to decide if they could seek other charges.

Garcia’s attorney, Robert Gorence, said his client was “joyous” after learning of the high court’s decision.

“He’s been factually innocent from the very beginning,” Gorence said. “This has caused him great anguish.”

___

Follow Russell Contreras at http://twitter.com/russcontreras

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/news/crime/article/NM-high-court-issues-setback-in-prostitution-case-4256156.php#ixzz2KAG6NzVS

 

http://www.sfgate.com/news/crime/article/NM-high-court-issues-setback-in-prostitution-case-4256156.php#src=fb

Comments Off on The Good News and the Bad News About The NM Ruling

Proof of Feminst Women’s Violence Against Prostitutes

Posted by

I have to challenge the women who promote the idea that they are not directly involved in violence against prostitutes.  Regardless of if  they believe that we’re all poor women of color and that’s why we work as prostitutes, we still  must  hold them accountable for the policies of criminalization of our occupation, the basis of violence, of which they support.  Since the author below has made such false and misleading statements in this article, I challenged her and other like her to face the reality of their role in the cycle of violence against our class that she and her heroes are actually responsible for.

There is no feminist war on sex workers

| February 4, 2013

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/feminist-current/2013/02/there-no-feminist-war-sex-workers

The author states that her heroes in life like Gloria Steinem, are not for arresting prostitutes because they see us as victims.  The author’s point, in this article, is to dispute another article by Melissa Gira Grant, who states that the feminist are actually in bed with the police and religious extremists who are actively bringing the violence to us prostitutes.

The War on Sex Workers

An unholy alliance of feminists, cops, and conservatives hurts women in the name of defending their rights.

http://reason.com/archives/2013/01/21/the-war-on-sex-workers/singlepage

 

Ms Murphy’s statement that we, the pro sex worker activists, are making up stories about how she and other women who say they’re about ending violence against us are really about continuing to criminalize prostitutes which is clearly a form of violence that has to be exposed.

Being arrested is a form of violence,

being put out of work is a form of economic violence,

having the police have sexual contact with us in the course of a prostitution sting operation and then arrest us for prostitution is a form of violence,

being forced into those shame based sex negative diversion programs or risk being prosecuted is a form of coercion-a form of violence,

being sentenced to give our labor for free in performing community service hours for prostitution convictions is a form of violence..

Not having access to our free speech, our first amendment right to negotiate for our own labor and safe work condition is a form of violence!

Not having the right to equal protection under the law because our occupation is criminalized is a form of violence.

My response to this author is this:

 

Dear Ms M. I wish to respond to your statement, “It is both unproductive and dishonest to claim that feminists advocate to criminalize prostituted women, as one of the few things feminists and those who advocate to end violence against prostitutes can agree on is that decriminalizing prostituted women is key.”
I have the ballot argument that Gloria Steinem signed to opposing San Francisco’s 2008 Proposition K that would have decriminalized prostitution. Would you like to see it? I also have a photo of fake researcher Melissa Farley holding a ‘no on prop k’ sign. Too, you are aware that an Ontario Superior Court Judge could only give little weight to her testimony because of her political position? There is plenty of evidence that your heroes have actively supported the continued criminalization of prostitution, my occupation, thereby supporting the war on the whores. I look forward to you response.

 

Here is the PDF of Gloria Steinem’s support in opposing the San Francisco 2008 ballot measure Proposition K that was printed in the voter information guide.  Prop K would have stopped arresting prostitutes and thereby stopping the primary violence against prostitutes.  She also notes in this statement that she opposed Berkeley’s Measure Q, a similar effort to stop the criminalization of prostitutes. She like others who’s names are listed in the documents, have continued to use their  class privilege to perch and preach from their Ivory towers the  very policies that are their preferred weapon of violence against prostitutes-Criminalization, incarceration, jail, shame bases sex negative psychological counseling.

CON Doc page 2

 

And here are other ballot arguments opposing ending the criminalization of prostitution signed by others who say they’re against violence.  7 paid opposed

 

 

Here is a photo of the fake researcher campaigning against Prop K.   Melissa Farley one of the leading American Feminist Scholars leading the push to criminalize all sex commerce on the grounds that prostitution is a form of personal violence that violates the personhood and human rights of “prostituted women,” was disqualified as a expert witness by an Ontario Superior Court Judge Himel who stated that: “Dr. Farley’s choice of language is at times inflammatory and detracts from her conclusions. . . Dr. Farley stated during cross-examination that some of her opinions on prostitution were formed prior to her research. . . For these reasons, I assign less weight to Dr. Farley’s evidence.”

.

Fake Researcher with campaign sign.

Fake Researcher with campaign sign.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Comments Off on Proof of Feminst Women’s Violence Against Prostitutes

Feminist Idea of Equality?

Posted by February 5, 2013

 

Equal protection comes in many forms.  One form is when we are victims of violence we, like anyone else have access to the Victims Compensation Fund as it’s called here in California.

How ever, California State regulation  649.56 states that victims can and are precluded from access the fund if those injuries occurred in the course of working as a prostitute.

http://www.vcgcb.ca.gov/law/regs.aspx

 

California State regulation  649.56. Involvement in the Qualifying Crime of Prostitution:

Involvement in the events leading to the qualifying crime of prostitution by the victim may be found if the victim was:

 

*  Engaged in activity related to prostitution.

*  The qualifying crime occurred as a direct result of the activity related to prostitution.

 

Activity related to prostitution includes, but is not limited to the following:

 

*  Soliciting or participating in the solicitation of an act of prostitution.

*  Purchasing or participating in the purchase of an act of prostitution.

*  Engaging in an act of prostitution.

*  Pimping as defined in California Penal Code, section 266h.<http://calvcpmanual.vcgcb.ca.gov/Codes/pc266h.txt>

*  Pandering as defined in California Penal Code, section 266i.<http://calvcpmanual.vcgcb.ca.gov/Codes/pc266i.txt>

 

Where are is the outrage from those women who claim to be against violence when prostitutes, who they consider only as victims, are denied access to the Victims Compensation Fund?

Comments Off on Feminist Idea of Equality?