quote:

---

One would have thought it self-evident that the best way to confront exploitation in the sex industry is to empower the women and men who work in it. Change happens when the oppressed themselves say enough is enough. It was black people who confronted racism; gender inequality was fought first and foremost by women; dreadful working conditions by workers selforganising through unions.

---

At the first brothel he visits, he asks if they're a union shop. "No", he's told. He asks the madam what percentage of the money goes to the house, and what percentage is kept by the worker. He's told "80% to house, 20% to the girl", so he leaves.

At the next brothel he again asks if it's a union shop, and again he's told "No". He inquires about the profit split, and this time is told "70% to the management, 30% to the girl", so again he leaves.

Finally he arrives at a brothel and is told that "Yes", it is a union shop. He inquires about the financial split and is told "The house keeps 15% for overhead, the rest goes to the worker". Delighted, he expresses his interest in a cute young readhead in the corner, then disappears upstairs to a room.

A few minutes later a very old, somewhat shopworn lady of the evening enters his room. "There must be a mistake", he says to her, "I specifically asked for the redhead in the corner".

It's work. All paid labour is exploitation in a sense. It all comes down to whether or not we can accept the terms of our own exploitation--if the benefits to both parties are acceptable to each, respectively.

I think this whole movement disregards to what extent trafficking in humans has become a huge international trade, some say it now exceeds drug trafficking.

quote:

---

Posted by lagatta:
Seeing other human beings as things to buy and sell for your pleasure isn't exactly edifying, now is it?

---

In my opinion, no. But is seeing other human beings (i.e. most of us wage slaves) as things to buy and sell for your profit edifying?

My point is that isn't it possible that there are women who would choose sex work if it occurred in an environment that was no more coercive or exploitational than that in which the rest of us trade our time and energy for money?

The ways in which people view sex are enormously varied, and while my particular conditioning makes the idea of hiring the services of a prostitute unappealing and the idea of providing such services even more so, I don't feel it's my place to impede others from what is a labour-intensive and ecologically friendly econom,ic transaction.

I guess I see unionisation as a way to manage it, though, and keep it as much on the up-an-up as is possible with something like this. I guess I'm hopeful that a union would work to minimize the negative effects the trade has on its participants. Maybe among the union organizers and the members, a set of guidelines and procedures could be set up. Maybe they could pay dues and a portion of the funds could go to providing medical insurance, or even dedicated clinics for sex workers. Maybe they'd be better able to keep track of people working in the trade, and thereby help to keep them safe--things like the Vancouver disappearances might not get so far along before someone took action etc.

quote:

---

Would you get more upset if your daughter, or girlfriend, or mother, gave a total stranger a backrup or if she had sex with a total stranger?
Assuming you would be more upset at the latter, why?

---

Well, mom's dead, and I have no kids, but to be honest I'd be more upset if my wife had sex with strangers for money, only because she's my wife you see. And while I'm not obsessed with monogamy, I think making a business out of adultery would be a bit more than I could bear. Mind you it would be the sex, not the finances of it, that I'd be against.

quote:

---

Would you get more upset if your daughter, or girlfriend, or mother, gave a total stranger a backrup or if she had sex with a total stranger?

---

I think the relevent question is 'would you be more upset about sex with a total stranger if she was being forced to it in a back alley by a pimp who'd hooked her on drugs and kept the money, or if she was working in a clean, safe, health concious worksite with proper rights?'

quote:

---

Instead of being deliberately addicted to drugs by scum who want to make sure their 'cattle'
don't wander too far.

---

I actually saw this the other day, with my own two eyes. I heard some talking in the alley behind my apartment & looked out the window to see a local creep ducking into a doorway to light up a rock. A young woman came down the alley, saw him, and started to turn away. He asked her what she wanted, and said "You can come back - I won't bite". She said she was looking for Rick, and continued to walk back out to the street. He invited her to enjoy some crack with him which she declined. He then said that if she ever "needed anything" she should look for him. Finally, he offered "and if you need some work, look me up".

I think that currently, the most humuliating and degrading part of the sex workers trade is not the sex act itself, but rather the exchange between prostitutes and law enforcement officials.

I actually think that far from legitimizig their exploitation, legalized prostitution, would advance the women's movement by acknowledging and legitimizing the work that some women choose to perform.

quote:

---

I actually think that far from legitimizig their exploitation, legalized prostitution, would advance the women's movement by acknowledging and legitimizing the work that some women choose to perform.

---

I quite agree. If the workers are able to control the conditions of their labour, then they're also better able to control the perception of that labour, and thereby move it away from a strictly exploitative arrangement, at least somewhat.

Inga Muscio has some interesting things to say about prostitution. Namely that waaaaaay back, in many cultures, prostitutes were even kind of revered for the intimate human knowledge and skill they possessed. They were more teachers and gurus than society's trash bin, as they are here in Canada (and probably most of the world) in the 21st century. I can't find a link to an excerpt or anything, sorry.

quote:

---

hey were more teachers and gurus than society's trash bin, as they are here in Canada (and probably most of the world) in the 21st century.

---

I don't think pride in one's work characterizes the 20th or 21st century prostitute the way it might have in antiquity. In the same regard, many mourn the loss of burlesque, which required a certain skill and flair, and which was apparently quite empowering for the dancer. Now we've replaced it with pole dancing. It's not a "profession" anymore, but a quick and dirty means to an end, the end typically being buying drugs or placating a pimp.

quote:

---

How is sex for money with a consensual, adult stranger categorically different from a backrub from a stranger, or a foot massage from a stranger? How is it different from paying a therapist to listen to your most private thoughts, or having someone you don't know massage cream into your face? How does it significantly differ from paying a surrogate to carry your baby?

---

The headlines in the local papers a few days ago shouted "Picton accused of killing 15 sex-trade workers!

I think the difference is obvious. If Picton had killed 15 masseuses, or 15 surrogate mothers or 15 therapists, the headlines would have claimed:

Picton accused of killing 15 women.

I was appalled at the headlines. First and foremost the thing Picton's victims had in common was that they were all women, and yet they are grouped together by virtue of their choice of work. It is as if they were less than human, and deserve about as much consideration as hunted animals.

So, I guess my point is that a strong difference between these women and the rest of the world is how society views and treats them.

They were much more than sex-trade workers. They were daughters, sisters, mothers and friends.

[ 25 July 2003: Message edited by: skadie ]

quote:

---

Would you get more upset if your daughter, or girlfriend, or mother, gave a total stranger a backrup or if she had sex with a total stranger?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mycroft:
A Hooter's has opened on Eglinton in Toronto right beside the Lick's burger joint I go to. I'm embarassed by being near it. Can't imagine what self-respecting person would actually eat there.

---

Oh. Uh... (sheepish grin)

I've actually been to Hooters once. A couple of years ago I went to the one near the CN Tower for supper with a good friend who lives here in Toronto. I thought, what the heck, I've heard so much about this place, let's see how bad it can be. The food wasn't bad at all (just burger and fries, you know), the server was nice, I picked up one of those "hooters" tank tops for a relative who is tiny with big boobs, and it was basically just another restaurant with a theme.

One thing that was interesting is that there was a bachelorette party happening there that night. I thought it was pretty weird to have it at Hooters, but the women attending seemed to think it was a great idea. They wore hooteresque tank tops with jeans, and good-naturedly allowed one of the guys there to take a picture with a few of them outside.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:
Without resorting to any Judeo-Christian morality, and without making any assumptions about what you believe love is, or intimacy is, or sex "should be":

How is sex for money with a consensual, adult stranger categorically different from a backrub from a stranger, or a foot massage from a stranger? How is it different from paying a therapist to listen to your most private thoughts, or having someone you don't know massage cream into your face? How does it significantly differ from paying a surrogate to carry your baby?

---

You can't truly be serious in asking this question..?

Last time I checked, a counsellor or psychiatrist wasn't there for sexual gratification...ditto for a beauty spa treatment. Judeo-Christian values have little to do with objecting to the commodification of an intimate human experience.

Certainly if bankers can create an organization like the Canadian Bankers Association to defend their interests, what's wrong with sex workers organizing as well?

quote:

---

Originally posted by satana:
You can't get much more intimate than disclosing your most private fears and desires to someone the way you would with a counsellor or psychiatrist. And how about hiring doctors, nurses and midwives?

---

That's a matter of opinion, and I think the motivation in your example is the difference -- presumably you are disclosing personal details/words/thoughts in an effort to heal or become healthier. Ditto with a medical practitioner.

Anyway, I think we should be working towards creating an environment where there isn't so much demand for prostitution. But until then, sex workers should be able to go about their business safely. Unions are one way to do that.

quote:

---

Anyway, I think we should be working towards creating an environment where there isn't so much demand for prostitution. But until then, sex workers should be able to go about their business safely. Unions are one way to do that.

In a way this is similar to the "green car" thread, and drug legalization arguments.

---

Bingo! What satana said!

The world we live in needs a military, it is like any other tool -- it can be used for helping others or hurting them. Our peacekeeping troops are a fine example of this, and I am sure you have listened to the news enough to hear the people of Liberia pleading for peacekeeping troops to halt the bloodshed there.

Ditto for prostitution; we don't need it of course, but it will be there. I would never use a prostitute (for health reasons alone, but the exploitation and karmic harm done to another person in that area is too much for my moral compass) but some people would, for whatever reason. I wish it weren't so, but comforting soothing phrases like "create an environment" do little other than provide a substitute for action.

quote:

---

I really don't see how those who scream about exploitation of women by some shadowy patriarchal conspiracy can advocate a union for said sex workers...does it not legitimize the objectification and commodification of women?

---

I dunno, the Canadian Bankers Association advocates on behalf of its members the right to mega mergers of banks which will put tens of thousands of (mostly low paid women) workers out of work.

If business has the right to organize and defend its interests, so do sex workers.

And one of the roles of a sex workers union might indeed be to assist women (and perhaps men) in obtaining training funds etc. to help get them out of the trade.

It seems that North Americans have a really narrow vision of the role of unions. When I was in El Salvador in the 1980's the street vendors who sold lottery tickets belonged to a union.

One can argue that lotteries are not necessarily a "good" thing for a society...but those who do the work have the right to form organizations to improve their living conditions.

I do recall some years ago hearing a CBC radio interview with "Temperance Bill" Temple, a famous anti-alcohol advocate, and former CCF member of the Ontario legislature from the High Park area of Toronto.

At the same time as he was advocating the banning of booze, there was a strike going on at Brewer's Retail. In the interview he said that even though he advocated an outright ban on booze...he said he also supported the Brewer's Retail workers fight for better conditions.

quote:

---

Last time I checked, a counsellor or psychiatrist wasn't there for sexual gratification...ditto for a beauty spa treatment.

---

So basically, all you're saying is "the sex trade is different from all other trades because it involves sex." That's as circular as the belief that the Bible is the word of God because it says so in the bible.

quote:

---

Judeo-Christian values have little to do with objecting to the commodification of an intimate human experience.

---

What, exactly, is an "intimate" experience, and how is it defined so that sex is intimate, but massage, or therapy, or a simple foot rub isn't??

quote:

---

But that's just me.

---

Exactly. I'm asking for something a little more objective. Something that transcends your morals, or Jerry Falwell's morals, or even Sue Johannsen's morals. Something that makes sex a categorically different thing.

[ 28 July 2003: Message edited by: Mr. Magoo ]

By improving the environment I mean finding out the reasons people get into prostitution in the first place, and addressing those issues. Poverty is probably the biggest problem. For some people sex work is a way to gain independence, pay for an education, or help support their own family. People in that situation should be given better opportunities and options. I'm sure everyone can agree on this. But what is wrong with providing at the same time safer conditions for sex workers to work in?

[ added ]

Some interesting writing from the UK (257KB .doc file) via NSWP:

quote:

---

...

Objections to sex work seem to focus on the unacceptability of sexual pleasure being commodified, as if human beings’ capacity for sexual pleasure was so special and important, it should never be tarnished by the exchange of money. I find this odd. We accept the commodification of water and food, without which no human life would be possible, why not sex?
...
I do not argue that this commodification of the body or persona is “ideal”, just that, since it happens, it is better to define and defend the rights of those involved.

...

Abolitionist feminism alleges that no woman chooses to sell sex. This dictum applies even where the woman herself believes she is making a free choice to sell sexual services and even where no physical violence or external coercion takes place.

I believe it is completely incompatible with the human right to autonomy, and with what I understand by feminism, to dismiss or override any woman’s choices or assessment of her own best interests. To denigrate women’s choices as self-delusional or based on “false consciousness” is not feminism but fascism.

...

I think the question of whether sex work is intrinsically or essentially degrading is irrelevant, since to make that judgement involves a number of beliefs about the place of sexual activity in human relationships, which it is unlikely all societies will ever agree on, never mind all individuals. In my experience, many sex workers do feel their occupation is degrading, feel self-hatred and shame, and while this state of mind may be largely due to the stigmatization and demonization they experience from “respectable” society, it may also arise out of personal religious beliefs, beliefs that sex itself is disgusting, or out of the experience of giving sexual services to people they find personally unattractive. However, other sex workers do not share these feelings or beliefs. Many see the role of sex worker as a “role”, in the sense of acting a part, which some play with relish and personal enjoyment; others play professionally, pleased if a good performance is well-rewarded, but without necessarily getting much personal satisfaction from the job.

...

I do not think that sex work is “a job like any other”. It manifestly is not. I use the term “sex work”, because it avoids the moral condemnation often attached to the term “prostitution”. It also reflects the reality that commercial sex, even where illegal, is an economic activity, and as such, is influenced by market forces, such as supply and demand. I also believe that understanding sex work as a form of labour helps to promote rights and protections for sex workers, such as the right to safe working conditions and protection from exploitation and violence.

...

Most public policy towards sex work reflects fear and hatred of sex workers, exacerbates their vulnerability, and hinders the investigation of crimes of violence against them. It is therefore possible to conceptualize violence against sex workers as one aspect of public policy in the control of prostitution. The argument that policies and legal changes which would promote safer working conditions should be rejected, lest they should “encourage” sex work, demonstrates that the violence is seen by many as a deterrent, as well as a punishment to those involved.

That people who claim to be feminists should embrace these positions seems extraordinary, yet most anti-trafficking and anti-client strategies depend entirely on law-enforcement interventions.

...

---

[ 28 July 2003: Message edited by: satana ]

I am rather amused at you insinuating that the many feminist and left groups who signed the other petition I linked to, including the leading lesbian associations in France, the Human Rights League, the LCR (trotskyist) and Radio Libertaire (an anarchist radio station) subscribe to Judeo-Christian moralism à la moral majority.

from lagatta's linked article:

quote:

---

In establishing policy here, Quebec can find inspiration in the Swedish experience and in the approaches of cities such as Toronto and Vancouver where there are efforts to give prostitutes the help and protection they need, to put in place means of resistance to pimps and dealers (often the same), and to dissuade and sensitise customers. The abolition of prostitution can only be a long term objective, but we need now to question all social, economic, and sexual relations of domination, and take immediate steps to fight poverty and violence against women.

---

[ 28 July 2003: Message edited by: satana ]

quote:

---

Yet when it comes to the sex industry, social reformers become moralists and certain strands of feminism lose the plot. Witness Julie Bindel, writing on these pages recently, who was enraged at the very idea of a sex workers' trade union.

The justification for this position is riddled with contradiction. It usually starts with a description of the misery of prostitutes who face daily victimisation and violence; it concludes that this abuse defines the industry and that allowing prostitutes a union would simply legitimise it. In other words, the greater the exploitation, the less justification there is for a union. What complete nonsense.

---

quote:

---

One can argue that lotteries are not necessarily a "good" thing for a society...but those who do the work have the right to form organizations to improve their living conditions.

---

quote:

---

Abolitionist feminism alleges that no woman chooses to sell sex. This dictum applies even where the woman herself believes she is making a free choice to sell sexual services and even where no physical violence or external coercion takes place.

---

I've often held this same belief, and probably, if I really get into it, still think that there's no real way that, given a full array of options, a woman would choose sex work with her own free will. The clincher is that full array of options, though, which is not available to all women.

I don't know what motivates a woman to start selling sex. I can only imagine variations on a seriously negative situation leading to a dire need for money. But my imagination is limited, I'll be the first to admit, and the older I get, the less comfortable I am with denying anyone their agency just because I don't understand what they choose to do.

All the same, I can't understand anyone opposing unionization for these women. To me it seems like the only recourse they may have for protecting themselves against the real dangers of the work they do. And as I and others have pondered, perhaps the union could also work as something of an agent for helping women (or men) who would like to get back into the "mainstream" workforce, and provide advocacy and medical care etc. How can that be wrong? I can only see it strengthening the women (and men) in the industry, individually and collectively, which I think must necessarily be a good thing.

And as for the concerns about legitimizing their exploitation...I think we legitimize exploitation all the time. Why shouldn't sex workers be allowed to unionize if it's totally okay for people to buy nike sneakers and gap clothes?

[ 28 July 2003: Message edited by: Lima Bean ]

quote:

---

perhaps the union could also work as something of an agent for helping women (or men) who would like to get back into the "mainstream" workforce

---

Why would any union work to lose members, their class force, (and the union dues) that go along with them?

I assume that this union is on a trade union basis (being the sex trade, which encompass' a lot more people than just the sterotypical prostitute). So once people leave the trade, they would also be leaving (and thus weakening) the union.

No union I know of would ever adopt that losing strategy, why would a union of sex trade workers be any different?

Maybe the GMB works differently than I'm used to in Canada, and is more of a general industrial union where members can change jobs and keep their membership as well as collective bargining power?

quote:

---

Why would any union work to lose members, their class force, (and the union dues) that go along with them?

---

Unions have been long advocates of increasing educational and training opportunities for their members. This isn't new at all.