Prop K

Ode To Margo St. James

Posted by May 1, 2021

I first spoke with Margo St. James in 2008 following the failure of Proposition K – a San Francisco city wide ballot measure to decriminalize prostitution and defund diversion programs. I was the proponent and qualified it for the ballot.

Someone had given me Margot’s phone number and said I should call her at her home in Western Washington. I called Margo and she started talking about Coyote v Roberts – which was a class action lawsuit litigated against the state of Rhode Island in 1976. Margo told me that four members of Coyote (Call Off Your Old Tired Ethics) had gone to RI to work and became the plaintiffs in 1976. She thought that the way forward was to bring a similar lawsuit in California.

So I started calling people in Rhode Island to figure out information about that lawsuit.

Because of the visibility that Proposition K had brought me, I was asked along with Veronica Monet, to participate in an event called Rebellious Lawyers at Yale Law School in Connecticut. This provided me with an opportunity to drive to the Rhode Island’s State Capital courthouse to search for information on lawsuit.

The Coyote v Roberts case claimed that Rhode Island’s anti prostitution law was bening enforcemed in a discriminatory way against women but not men. This eventually lead to the Rhode Island legislature removing the criminalization of indoor prostitution from the law books to settle the lawsuit out of court.

Because we’d had so much trouble raising money to support Prop K in 2008, because folks didn’t want their names, home addresses and work identified in associaiton with prostitution, I founded a 501(c) non-profit the Erotic Service Providers Legal Education and Research Project (ESPLERP) in 2010, so we could collect donations anonymously. I recruited a first amendment rights attorney, gathered plaintiffs and some money and in March 2015, we filed a groundbreaking court case, ESPLERP v Gascon [16-15927].

We asked the Federal courts to find that California’s prostitution statute 647(b), unconstitutional. George Gascon was San Francisco’s district attorney at the time – and so he ended up as the first named defendant, along with the District Attorney’s of Marin, Sonoma and Alameda Counties.

The case went all the way to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which eventually dismissed it in October 2017 . But even so, in its judgement, the court did state that the State of California legislator should review anti-prostitution law..

Although we didn’t get the anti prostitution law struck down at that time, we did get the attention of many District Attorneys, who clearly had never conceived of the idea that people actually thought that they had the constitutional right to be prostitutes and customers of prostitutes.
It was like the knowledge of Margo St. James and all her comrades’ good work to give rights to whores had never touched their ears. But as a result, while the police continued to enforce the law, we saw a definite slowing of prosecutions and turnover in the diversion programs.

We also got the attention of legislators. Our allies in the California legislature were able to pass progressive legislation such as SB 239 which repealed the criminalization of HIV positive status, and SB 233 which gives immunity to anyone reporting a serious crime without being charged with prostitution, and condoms can no longer be used as probable cause to make prostitution arrests.

Ironically, George Gascon went on to be elected Los Angeles County District Attorney, and immediately started to roll back the prosecution of misdemeanors including prostitution. So much so that the LA County sheriff recently complained that Gascón had “basically legalized” prostitution in Los Angeles by failing to prosecute suspected solicitation of prostitution cases referred his office by LA police.

So, in this way, we see Margo St. James’ fight to decriminalize prostitution delivering results.

It doesn’t matter whether we’re charismatic like Margo, whether we are worldly and educated like Margo, or whether we have lots of friends, lovers and comrades like Margo. We can still make a difference and have a role to play.

We believe that prostitution should not be criminalized – and that prostitutes and our customers and our larger communities make valuable contributions to humanity, that we make a difference in the world.

So go join your local movement and lend your talents, your energy, your money, and your presence towards that end. Everyone has a role to pay.

Maxine Doogan
May 2021

Comments Off on Ode To Margo St. James

Proof of Feminst Women’s Violence Against Prostitutes

Posted by February 6, 2013

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