Latest feminist cause: Prostitutes’ rights
I don’t know, I just don’t know. The world is a backward place.
Lori at Feministing is celebrating International Human Rights Day today by championing the rights of Indian “sex workers”:
In honor of this special anniversary, and in an effort to highlight grassroots efforts to ensure the inclusion of women and girls in the promise the Universal Declaration, check out this fantastic new IWHC short documentary highlighting the mobilization efforts of sex workers in rural India….
Not just adult female prostitutes but “girls”? How terrible.
The foundational argument of this video is that prostitutes must be given such rights as unionization so as to cut the HIV rate in India. Bizarrely, one clip shows prostitutes meeting with wives to argue that legitimizing their trade will help lower the spread of HIV. (Note also that pimps are called “employers.”)
Rather, the tired answer the other side hates to hear, to their peril, is abstinence and marital faithfulness are the simple answers to all sexually related diseases, unwanted pregnancies, exploitation of women and girls, and broken homes. How far they go to avoid this simple truth.
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
“Rather, the tired answer the other side hates to hear, to their peril, is abstinence and marital faithfulness are the simple answers to all sexually related diseases, unwanted pregnancies, exploitation of women and girls, and broken homes. How far they go to avoid this simple truth.”
THIS. SAYS. IT. ALL.
Prostitutes’ rights is a legitimate women’s rights cause, because many of these girls and women are victims of human trafficking. But when dealing with SLAVERY, collective bargaining probably isn’t going to do the trick.
I have mixed feelings about this topic — while I agree with abstinence and marital faithfulness, prostitution has been going on for centuries. Those who support prostitutes’ rights aren’t saying it’s a wonderful thing, but that sex workers need to work in conditions that are safe. Supplying them with condoms and insisting that their “johns” use them would cut down on HIV transmission. And yes, I support trying to give sex workers other options, but some of them just aren’t going to leave that field.
On a side note, as you probably know, China’s one child policy has created a shortage of girls, and this is expected to lead to an increase in prostitution. I wonder how the Chinese government will handle this . . .
On July 20, 2001, The National Institute of Allergy and Infectious
Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Department of Health and Human Services held a workshop by experts in the field entitled: Scientific Evidence on Condom Effectiveness
for Sexually Transmitted Disease (STD) Prevention. The report from that meeting is linked below.
http://www3.niaid.nih.gov/about/organization/dmid/PDF/condomReport.pdf
From the Report:
“Lessons from Pregnancy Studies
Information on consistent and correct condom use for the prevention of pregnancy has also provided valuable insights on the importance of consistent use. Approximately 3% of couples who reported using condoms consistently and correctly (considered “perfect use”) are estimated to experience an unintended pregnancy during the first year of use (123), based on results of one rigorous controlled trial as well as modeling based on rates of condom breakage and slippage. In a recent well-controlled randomized clinical trial of monogamous couples using latex male condoms for contraception over six months, the pregnancy rate during “typical use” was reported at 6.3%, with a 1.1% pregnancy rate during “consistent use” (45). Most of these couples had experience using condoms. However, based on estimates from National Surveys of Family Growth (123), 14% of couples are estimated to experience an unintended pregnancy during the first year of “typical” use, a failure rate that includes both inconsistent (non-use) and incorrect use, as well as breakage and slippage. Failure rates in the second year of typical use are about 50% lower (167).”
If these percentages hold for monogamous couples taking great care, then HIV transmission rates are at least as great as sperm transmission rates during condom failure.
Also from the study:
“Overall, Davis and Weller estimated that condoms provided an 85% reduction in HIV/AIDS transmission risk when infection rates were compared in always versus never users.”
85% reduction translates into 15% transmission rate. Over an eight year period, a woman is almost certain to contract HIV.
Way to go feminists. Way to look out for your little sisters.
Gerard, another fabulous comment, thanks.
Prolifers are always talking about how condoms don’t work, but at the very least they offer some protection. Many people just aren’t going to practice monogamy. Gerald, while I can see your point, wouldn’t you rather have these women use condoms than nothing at all? They do offer protection from some STI’S.
Kelsey is right — some of these women are trafficked, and in many cases mothers hand down their profession to their daughters. It’s very, very hard to get out of.
So once again feminists prove without a shadow of doubt that it’s really all about the penis and power. (Which is really about empowering the penis while they naively think they have power over the penis.)
Human rights? What human rights? Where this eventually goes is absolutely horrendous.
“Slavery is freedom.”
“Abortion anytime, anywhere.”
“Rape is real love.”
“Beating is a sign of respect.”
In their attempts to control the penis, they’ve slipped into a depraved insanity, which is leads to nothing but death and despair.
Those “champion” feminists who truly think this BS empowers women need to get real. I’m going to pray like David does in the Psalms – that God might place those who demand such “rights” into situations where those “rights” can be seen for what they truly are – that they might experience those situations 1st hand.
If that doesn’t bring them to reality, nothing else will.
Phillymiss,
I’m running out to dinner with the family and would love to pick this up with you later. In short, condoms simply do not work. We need to start from there and then discuss rational policy. How about beginning by hunting down and ridding ourselves of sex traffickers and pimps? They’re vermin. I can think of no better use for police and military.
We can’t hold out condoms any longer. When I come home, I’m going to link to CDC data that will take your breath away.
God Bless.
Community Organizing in India! Unionizing sex workers! Is Wade Rathke in the mix?
The International Women’s Health Coalition which helped produce the sex-worker video has as one of their board members (Vice-chair) a woman who served for a decade as a Trustee of NARAL. and currently serves as a Trustee Planned Parenthood of NYC. IWHC has found a nice little niche for themselves in India masquerading as helpers of women. (from:www.iwhc.org)
How about helping these women break FREE from this life? Things like Education and job skills? Get them out of this damaging lifestyle and into an independent lifestyle free of being used for sex.
Hi, Kelsey! It’s nice to see you back. :)
I agree with Phillymiss that this is something that we need to give women some more opportunities for. I suppose that there are some women out there who become prostitutes because they want to, but I would say that this probably constitutes a rather small percentage of prostitutes. For the time being, it’s best to get women to a better state. I read in an article that women, for example, only own one percent of the world’s land, have no access to education in many parts of the world, and in parts of the Middle East (sorry- I don’t remember exactly which parts) women are sometimes allowed to be starved or dehydrated until they give in to their husbands wishes or sometimes, if they cannot escape a horrific marriage, they will set themselves on fire. It’s all sad. Prostitution is sort of like abortion then- a result of when women don’t have rights.
To get rid of things like prostitution or abortion is to empower women, then. I would, as a girl, like to live in a world like that.
But I have to admit, I was disgusted when I saw “girls.” I’m more concerned with getting girls out of prostitution than making certain that they can get in.
Rather, the tired answer the other side hates to hear, to their peril, is abstinence and marital faithfulness are the simple answers to all sexually related diseases, unwanted pregnancies, exploitation of women and girls, and broken homes.
But India is a male-dominated society, where prostitution will not go away. This is a nation where unknown numbers of men transmit HIV from prostitutes to their wives, and girls are driven into prostitution due to extreme poverty.
We feminists have always acknowledged that abstinence and monogamous relationships are the ideals both girls and boys. But you seem to distort Feministing’s post. The contributor is not saying that feminists support prostitution. She is reminding her readers that prostitutes are being excluded from the promise of the 1948 UN Declaration of Human Rights – a great document championed by both Winston Churchill and Eleanor Roosevelt that turned 61 years old today.
Oh, and condom + pill = 100% effectiveness. It is the ultimate form of birth control – the dual method. Always have a backup.
Condom + pill may have a near-perfect effective rate for preventing pregnancy, but the pill does nothing to prevent STDs.
yeah, like the “girls” in the picture look soooo happy about their sex “careers”!
How many of these women would really “choose” such a career?
leave it up to the feminists to get yet another thing a$$ backward.
We feminists have always acknowledged that abstinence and monogamous relationships are the ideals both girls and boys.
oh yeah, sure you have!
In fact, every feminist policy ever promulgated has worked at destroying marriage and encouraging sexual activity at as early an age as possible.
Condom+pill=100% effectiveness. I am LOL. I cannot tell you how many healthcare workers doctors, nurses, even Ob-Gyn nurses, PTs, etc. who were using 2 forms of birth control and still got pregnant.
Didn’t you hear about the lawsuit against a PP executive by an abortionist who gave his “free” services as a favor to get the PP exec. out of the jam of an unplanned pregnancy by his girlfriend, but when they had a falling out that ended up in court the abortionist “spilled the beans” on the PP executive. The abortionist put this in his lawsuit, probably to embarrass the guy. I just thought of a caption for the story “Banned Parenthood Bigwig, The Poster Boy for The Safe Sex Industry, Caught with His Pants Down, Abortionist Bales Him Out”. How’d that 100% prevention work for him? Still ended up mutilating, dismembering and murdering his unborn baby.
NEWSFLASH FROM THE HISTORY DEPARTMENT: Prostitutes’ rights have been a feminist cause since the 1970s.
Posted by: HistorianofFeminism at December 10, 2009 8:16 PM
Yup, just like abortion. And what have we gotten – women with emotional and psychiatric problems, breast cancer, dead babies, broken relationships, sterility etc.
Just think what supporting sex slavery will bring us?
NEWSFLASH FROM THE HISTORY DEPARTMENT: Prostitutes’ rights have been a feminist cause since the 1970s.
Posted by: HistorianofFeminism at December 10, 2009 8:16 PM
Where? What rights are you talking about?
How many times does the average prostitute get pregnant and abort each year (assuming the pregnancies are being terminated right away)?
The abortion industry would suffer if prostitution wasn’t thriving so to act like protecting prostitutes “rights” is a noble cause is ridiculous. They are protecting Big-Abortion.
yes, Janet when I use to sidewalk counsel I saw many many prostitutes who went into abortion clinics…..
Pro-lifer, I had to laugh out loud too. My boss many years ago was using the pill and condoms and conceived TWICE within three years!
I was on the pill and conceived my son, and no I was not on antibiotics and yes I took it every day, same time every day too. If the condom can fail the pill can too. And they can both fail in the same month. Nothing is “foolproof”
Those who support prostitutes’ rights aren’t saying it’s a wonderful thing, but that sex workers need to work in conditions that are safe.
It’s inherently not safe. There is nothing physically, mentally, emotionally or otherwise safe about having sex with strangers. There is no way to make something destructive safe. And unlike other dangerous jobs, there is no need or good that comes from prostitution. All it does is kill people and destroy families.
There is no right way to do a wrong thing. These women deserve better than this abuse- and giving them thin pieces of rubber that might delay a deadly disease is not compassionate at all. The loving thing is to offer women a way out of this Hell, not vainly make that Hell a little “safer.”
Gerard, do you have a blog? I want to subscribe.
Posted by: Jacqueline at December 10, 2009 10:12 PM
Amen.
More from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on the male latex condom and STD’s.
From the report linked in my post above, CDC has produced the following document:
Condoms and STDs: Fact Sheet for Public Health Personnel
http://www.cdc.gov/condomeffectiveness/latex.htm
From the document:
“Consistent and correct use of male latex condoms can reduce (though not eliminate) the risk of STD transmission. To achieve the maximum protective effect, condoms must be used both consistently and correctly. Inconsistent use can lead to STD acquisition because transmission can occur with a single act of intercourse with an infected partner. Similarly, if condoms are not used correctly, the protective effect may be diminished even when they are used consistently. The most reliable ways to avoid transmission of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), are to abstain from sexual activity or to be in a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with an uninfected partner. However, many infected persons may be unaware of their infections because STDs are often asymptomatic or unrecognized.”
It’s hard to see where condoms for prostitutes factors in here. Note that the document does not include the 15% transmission rate noted in the July 20, 2001 conference proceedings linked in my post above, from which this document was generated. Only the qualitative “highly effective” is used regarding HIV transmission:
“Latex condoms, when used consistently and correctly, are highly effective in preventing the sexual transmission of HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. In addition, consistent and correct use of latex condoms reduces the risk of other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including diseases transmitted by genital secretions, and to a lesser degree, genital ulcer diseases. Condom use may reduce the risk for genital human papillomavirus (HPV) infection and HPV-associated diseases, e.g., genital warts and cervical cancer.”
This “highly effective” makes no sense considering that the conference in 2001 established a 15% transmission rate of HIV. Further, the Fact Sheet is less enthusiastic about diseases that also get transmitted through semen, such as gonorrhea, chlamydia, and trichomoniasis:
“Latex condoms when used consistently and correctly, reduce the risk of transmission of STD’s such as gonorrhea, Chlamydia, and trichomoniasis.”
So the document neglects to quantify “highly effective” in terms of a 15% transmission rate for HIV. The rest of STD’s obviously are transmitted with a higher degree of frequency, given the less-than-enthusiastic language.
To suggest that anything is better than nothing for prostitutes, is to deny the plainly obvious. These transmission rates are established mainly through studies on monogamous couples. Given the failure rates what we are really talking about is how quickly we wish to see prostitutes become infected, not WHETHER they become infected.
The most commonsense statement of this fact sheet is:
“The most reliable ways to avoid transmission of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), are to abstain from sexual activity or to be in a long-term mutually monogamous relationship with an uninfected partner.”
Which is as close as CDC is going to come to the traditional moral norm of virginity, followed by fidelity in marriage.
Finally, the following link is to a CDC PowerPoint on the rates of various STD’s in the US since the 1960’s. Some commentary below the link.
When you get to the page after clicking the link, look under “Color Slides” and click on “All Slides”.
http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats08/slides.htm
Note that the bacterial infections that manifest immediately, such as syphilis, gonorrhea, and chancroid take a dip after the onset of the HIV pandemic in the mid 1980’s. That’s because of increased public health surveillance in going out to infected partners and treating with antibiotics to dry up the reservoir of pathogen in the community.
Treatable diseases that remain mostly asymptomatic, such as trichomoniasis and Chlamydia have steadily climbed before and during a 25 year period of unprecedented condom use. The same may be said for viral diseases such as HPV and Herpes.
All that condoms have done is give a false sense of security that has led to greater sexual activity, which when multiplied by the failure rate to protect has actually driven up the STD’s. The data are right there for all to see.
That isn’t the Pope’s blog. That’s the CDC.
The answer for prostitutes is education, jobs, social services, church support networks, and the thundering message of the Gospel that they have been made in the image and likeness of God. They are members of the Household of God, daughters of the King. No one argues over how best and safest to keep the King’s daughters “safely” ensconced as whores.
There are organizations in the US that help unionize young women and girls who have entered into the sex industry. These organizations provide counseling, contraceptives, health services, safe places to stay, education and skill training workshops for careers entirely removed from the sex industry.
Most of the organizations that I am aware of work with sex workers, specifically younger teens and young women to develop a sense of self and set of skills that will allow for them to provide for themselves in a career outside of the sex industry.
I think there is a great deal of common ground between those who identify as feminists and those who do not on this issue. No one wants to see women enter into situations that are dangerous or that are upsetting/uncomfortable.
The organization within the feministing article is not creating the social context or the market for prostitution in India, it is reacting to a preexisting condition and advocating for women within the context. I agree that it falls short of what I would consider an ideal support network for these women, and I am sure that the organization would agree. But at least they are doing something about it. It wouldn’t be fair for me to criticize how they aren’t doing enough for these women if I am sitting here hanging out on the internet. =)
In an ideal world women and children would never feel the need to choose to enter into work that was physically dangerous or that they considered immoral. I wish we lived in that world.
Posted by: Gerard Nadal at December 10, 2009 11:53 PM
——
Excellent post Gerard.
Your conclusion (daughters of the King) is absolutely spot-on.
That collection of slides is unbelievable! It shows the STD trends steadily increasing towards the vertical.
Two things stand out when looking through the slides:
1) For chlamydia and it’s variants the infection rate is almost double in women. It seems the female body is highly susceptible to this particular disease. The long term consequences are cervical cancer etc.
2) For almost all STDs the black population is at highest risk and with the greatest transmission.
Gerard – if I’m reading these charts correctly, as younger, more sexually aggressive populations age, we’ll see stratospherically increasing medical costs with secondary symptoms and effects across a wide body of the population of the US. Is that correct?
That seems to be a severe motivation for passing “health reform” – we have a perfect storm brewing. The baby-boomers moving into final stages of life with the greatest medical costs, but also due to sexual proclivities, a younger generation being severely impacted with secondary effects such as cancer. I can clearly see why rationing health care would be demanded. The victims that stoked earlier profits will start becoming expensive burdens.
Is that correct?
Would you be able to tell that story using the CDC slides for a post?
The answer for prostitutes is education, jobs, social services, church support networks, and the thundering message of the Gospel that they have been made in the image and likeness of God. They are members of the Household of God, daughters of the King. No one argues over how best and safest to keep the King’s daughters “safely” ensconced as whores.
I agree. We need to provide an alternative like you said, coupled with the message of the dignity of these women to see that they are worth more than prostitution, even if they “earn” less. We’re not talking about women in the American porn industry or strip clubs, who could chose to leave that industry and work as waitresses or at Taco Bell but choose the sex industry for the money (and to support a drug habit they develop in order to do the “work”). Crushing poverty in India and sexism inhibit other ways of female self-sufficiency, so much that most women that are not prostitutes in India are supported by a male breadwinner. These women, probably already diseased, likely feel that they are not going to be find a man to marry them and worse, with 40% of new transmissions of AIDS being to married women, the concept of fidelity in a non-Christian, misogynistic world is foreign to these men. They bring home HIV to their faithful spouses, who are perhaps only faithful because the consequences of cheating could be divorce and starvation. So even a newly-saved woman could degradate herself out of pure desperation is we, her brethren, don’t do something to protect her. And if we don’t minister to everyone, the husbands that buy prostitutes for one, women will continue to suffer horrid conditions in spite of the realization of her worth.
One amazing religious order in the Phillipines rescues girls from prostitution and they earn money through making jewelry and other fundraising items that the nuns sell. I have a bracelet from these ladies.
The organization within the feministing article is not creating the social context or the market for prostitution in India, it is reacting to a preexisting condition and advocating for women within the context. I agree that it falls short of what I would consider an ideal support network for these women, and I am sure that the organization would agree.
It’s legitimizing the exploitation of these women by conceding that they will remain in these situations rather than focusing solely on a way out. The preexisting context needs to change, and until that happens, women should not be victims in that context. Boxes of condoms, which only delay AIDS for these women considering the failure rate, is putting a seal of approval on this abuse. It’s like a parent saying, “You don’t have a drivers license and don’t know how to safely drive. Do NOT drive my car while I’m away.” and following up with, “But if you do drive it, buckle your seatbelt.” The second message contradicts the first, and you just hear, “As long as I wear the seatbelt, they are okay with me driving, although they don’t like it.” And that’s what these groups do. They send the message, “As long as I wear the condom, they are okay with prostitution, although they don’t like it.” And to hear the “educated” women saying that they now use a condom every time, they buy the lie that they will still not end up dying of AIDS.
Basically, we’re putting our stamp of approval on a form of slavery when our efforts aren’t focused on rescue, but on making the victims a little safer. It’s not a case of doing the best we can in a horrible situation, it’s saying that there is a right way to do a wrong thing. THERE IS NO RIGHT WAY TO DO A WRONG THING.
I understand your position, Leslie, I just disagree and feel like these efforts that concede to victimization do more harm than good.
‘…and girls’
WHAT. THE..
Do they not CARE that making child protistution ‘ok’ is what leads to exploiting girls against their will, a.k.a. sex slavery and trafficking? AUGH.
So these particular feminists at Femilisting don’t have a problem with child prostitutes, only that they aren’t unionized. Good to know!
Jacqueline-
I appreciate your thoughtful response.The effort and accuracy that you put into describing and analyzing the social climate in India demonstrates a true understanding of the complex social and economic factors that lead women to work within the sex industry.
I understand your belief that saving women by means of conversion to Christianity and Christian values will save them from participating in the sex industry because they will determine that working within the sex industry is not compatible with their newfound faith.
What conversion to Christianity does not address is the “Crushing poverty in India and sexism inhibit other ways of female self-sufficiency, so much that most women that are not prostitutes in India are supported by a male breadwinner.” I don’t think that this part of the struggle is going to change anytime soon. Do you see conversion to Christianity as an immediate fix for economic and social immobility within India? I don’t see how it could help these women immediately.These women need help now.
These organizations create community for these women and provide them with employable skills and information allowing women to makes choices for themselves. Do they encourage women to use condoms? I’m sure. I hope they encourage them to use them with their husbands, too. Are condoms foolproof? Absolutely not. But when engaging in sexual activity, it is safer to use condoms than to not use any method of contraceptive. Do they encourage women to learn skills and develop a support network in hopes that these women will find options available outside of the sex industry? Absolutely.
Organizations do not have the funding to implore women to quit working altogether within the only industry they know and solely support them and their children (shelter food clothing protection) until they find opportunities to work within a new field. I think that they should be applauded for doing the best that they can within the context.
I find it perfectly appropriate to desire a faith or spiritual component within organizational outreach for women working within the sex industry, or to desire that organizations intend to aid women in leaving the sex industry and not simply minimize the risks.
I don’t think it is appropriate for community based organizations such as this one to be villianized for being the cause of these problems or not being the savior on behalf of these women.
Chris,
I don’t think that you are wrong about secondary sequelae such as pelvic inflammatory disease, cervical cancer, ectopic pregnancy, infertility, etc resulting from these ever-escalating STD’s.
If we step back and consider who it is pushing for “health reform”, it is the same crowd who are pushing for condoms, unrestricted sex, and population control. All of the sequelae play right into the left’s hands.
I agree that the slide set is stunning, and it’s all CDC data, not Catholic talking points memos. One need only consider the language of the Fact Sheet on condoms in relation to the slide set to see that condoms just don’t work as advertised. While it’s true that they don’t always slip and tear, they simply don’t cover the entire penis. Further, even for the percentage of the time that they do function nominally, the percent failure rate continues to increase the numbers of infected people in the population, most with the ‘silent’ infections such as chlamydia, trichomoniasis, herpes and HPV.
I would hasten to add that we are also becoming victims of our own success in treating HIV. With more and more people living longer with HIV, we are growing the population of HIV+ people. That’s a good thing. However, as an ever-larger population grows, so too does the probability of transmission when the antiviral drugs cease working.
We’ve bought the lie about condoms Chris, in spite of the CDC data to the contrary.
Cardinal O’Connor used to say, “Good morality is good medicine.”
But India is a male-dominated society, where prostitution will not go away. This is a nation where unknown numbers of men transmit HIV from prostitutes to their wives, and girls are driven into prostitution due to extreme poverty.
I agree. This is also true in sub-Saharan Africa.
Jacqueline, do you have the name of this organization?
Leslie,
I obviously didn’t explain myself very well, because you said EXACTLY what I meant. :) I will try clarify though more on the spirituality component.
You said, “What conversion to Christianity does not address is the “Crushing poverty in India and sexism inhibit other ways of female self-sufficiency, so much that most women that are not prostitutes in India are supported by a male breadwinner.”
That’s precisely what I meant; I must have just not explained it well. Giving a woman the self-worth of understanding her value (through Christ) does not feed her. Like I said, it’s not like waitressing and Taco Bell jobs exist in their context. So, yes, while they need an accurate understanding of how precious they are, I was telling Gerard that I agree with him that more is needed. He said jobs, education, social services, etc. I was explaining that even a woman who knows she’s worth more than selling her body would do so out of desperation. So while women need the self-worth to take a lower-paying job with dignity over high-paying dangerous degrading work (as in America), we know in India that these alternatives don’t exist. So telling a woman she’s worth more than prostitution won’t keep her from doing it out of desperation.
You then asked, “Do you see conversion to Christianity as an immediate fix for economic and social immobility within India? I don’t see how it could help these women immediately.These women need help now.”
Women do need help now. That’s what I was saying. But to answer your question- I do think that a conversion to Christianity is the ONLY fix for the AIDS crisis and abuse/exploitation of women. Most Christian women (even secular women in our Judeo-Christian culture) are safe from having husbands bringing AIDS home at the rate this happens in Africa and India. Christian ethics (abstinence and then fidelity) is the only cure for AIDS. Ministering and converting to a Christian lifestyle offers protection for women not found in pagan/muslim cultures.
Now, I love the work organizations do to rescue, train, support and otherwise assist women out of the industry. That’s not what I take issue with. And just because an organization can’t save all the women does not in any way detract from the good they are doing. I just insist that condom distribution is NOT one of those good things.
I had a conversation with a South African missionary friend of mine. We did our Masters in Social Work together and “harm reduction” was a major discussion we’d have. I oppose it on principle. She’d say, “But African culture doesn’t recognize marriages as monogamous like the West does. So even if you convince a wife to be faithful, she has a husband that is not. That’s why they encourage condom use in marriage.” But then again, the answer is to change the culture. We’re not talking about nuances. We’re talking about absolute right and wrong and the consequences that come with doing wrong even if that wrong is socially-accepted. Distributing condoms is a way of validating the socially-accepted by deadly aspects of a culture that need to change.
I don’t think it is appropriate for community based organizations such as this one to be villianized for being the cause of these problems or not being the savior on behalf of these women.
What I oppose is not their inability to fix everything and save every woman. What I oppose is the legitimizing of the abuse and the feeding women the lie that latex will protect them to any degree. That does not help them at all. They are victims. I wouldn’t toss a prostitute a condom (so at least she won’t get AIDS-yet) anymore than I would give a young girl in a statutory rape situation a pack of birth control pills (so at least she won’t get pregnant-yet). Abuse is abuse and these women can’t truly consent when coerced by poverty. I oppose the validation of prostitution as a profession rather than a vice. It’s misplaced compassion to make self-destructive women more comfortable in their self-destruction because it leads to self-destruction. And while there will always be women that choose to do this, those women don’t need training on how to do it in the least dangerous way. It’s like 80% of American women in the sex industry were raped or molested as children and only “consent” because being violated feels like home to them. All of these women are victims.
But India is a male-dominated society, where prostitution will not go away. This is a nation where unknown numbers of men transmit HIV from prostitutes to their wives, and girls are driven into prostitution due to extreme poverty.
I agree. This is also true in sub-Saharan Africa.
Then let’s change that rather than accepting and doing damage control with condoms.
By the way, I was referring to the organization in the video.
These organizations provide counseling, contraceptives, health services, safe places to stay, education and skill training workshops for careers entirely removed from the sex industry.
Isn’t it counterproductive to enable the behavior you’re supposedly trying to stop?
It reminds me, I was passing by a bulletin board for the Social Work Student Association (which I was an officer for back in college) and they were raising money for AIDS by doing a DRAG SHOW. A drag show at the gay bar. And I’m thinking, “Why not raise money to fight alcholism with keg stands?” Legitimizing behavior that causes or perpetuates the problem you are addressing makes me doubt the sincercity of those that really want these problems to end. When I was in SWSA we did child advocacy and raising support for the elderly- we didn’t stop obesity with pie-eating contests.
Jacqueline-
I appreciate your position on harm reduction and thank you for the clarification.
Side note:
I can’t imagine a better place to hold an AIDS fundraiser than a drag show. Gay people seem more willing to talk about HIV and AIDS than straight people. Gay bars are like straight bars, but with better dancing. It’s not like it is a bath house… =) I think the analogy works better if you are comparing AIDS fundraising efforts at sex addict orgies to keg stand fundraisers for alcoholism. Just because someone is gay, doesn’t mean that they have a sexual addiction or compulsion. Gay people can practice abstinence and maintain long term committed relationships, too.
Leslie I have to disagree as I read your post about “gay people can practice abstinence and maintain long term committed relationships too”. Very rarely does what you claimed occur. You really need to check out the research about why the FDA will not accept blood donations from MSM, the average number of partners homosexuals have and the health risks of homosexual sex. Take a look at the FDA article I will omit the http: at the beginning but look up
//www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccine/BloodBloodProducts/QuestionsaboutBlood/ucm108186.htm
Then check out Dr. John Diggs Jr.’s research paper “The Health Risks of Gay Sex” with about 6 pages of major research studies cited I will omit the http: but check //catholiceducation.org/articleshomosexuality/healthrisksSSA.pdf. He documents the high numbers of average yearly and life-time partners, extremely high risk of disease and injury due to sexual practices (rimming, fisting, anal intercourse, sadism, etc.), psychological risks and why the anatomic and physiologic risk is greater and also shortened life span (up to 20 years less). Not PC but no hatred, no phobia just medical facts. Did you know that a large percentage of lesbians have heterosexual sexual relationships and a higher incidence of STDs than other women although not as high as MSM.
Doing damage control with condoms, HAHAHAHA.
“In short, condoms simply do not work. We need to start from there and then discuss rational policy. How about beginning by hunting down and ridding ourselves of sex traffickers and pimps? They’re vermin. I can think of no better use for police and military.”
Another really well-informed post from the Prof. I think it would be a truly wonderful idea to give more power to the most repressive arm of the state. Brothel raids are violent affairs, and do little to help sex workers or “liberate” them. Most of the time, when the air clears (meaning when brothel owners give police a large payoff at the expense of their workers), the sex workers are in the exact place where they started: as sex workers, except for a few additional beatings, some rapes, and diminished ability to advocate for oneself (since, if a sex worker really needs the cash, she might not insist as much on contraceptive use).
The real way to assist sex workers isn’t to assume they’re universally oppressed–check out some examples of advocacy work. Maybe we should check out the ways that a globalized economy has rendered so many people poor, jobless and abject. Tell that poor sex worker to stop demeaning herself and get back to the rice paddies–oh wait, the family farm’s been sold to some transnational agribusiness. But in the meantime, let’s take away her condoms and tell them they don’t work.
Sounds smart to me. Stick to freshman biology.
I don’t know why prolifers insist on being so anti-condom. Okay, so they’re not foolproof. But they’re better than nothing, aren’t they?
BTW, at least here in Philadelphia, AIDs is being spread mainly by heterosexuals, particularly by men who are “on the down low” (closeted gay men who have sexual relations with other men and then spread it to their partners).
“But in the meantime, let’s take away her condoms and tell them they don’t work.”
I am prolife to the core, but it irritates me when prolifers insist on being so anti-condom. Okay, so they’re not foolproof. But they’re better than nothing, aren’t they?
BTW, if you want to see an interesting movie about sex workers in India, check out “Born Into Brothels.” The prostitutes live with their families in the brothels, and the girls are expected to go into the family “business” whether they want to or not. It’s very, very hard to get out of this life.
Phillymiss,
“I don’t know why prolifers insist on being so anti-condom. Okay, so they’re not foolproof. But they’re better than nothing, aren’t they?”
Let me see if I can explain: Let’s replace “condom” with “bullet-proof vest” and prostitution with bank robbery. Bank robbers are shot while fleeing the crime scene and bullet-proof vests help. Okay, so they’re not foolproof. But they’re better than nothing, aren’t they?
Actually, if we are reminded that robbery is dangerous because it’s wrong- then there is no need to participate in it to begin with thus requiring protection from an unnecessary danger we can see how offensive providing sex slaves with the tools to continue being enslaved really is. Yes, circumstances and desperation lead people to sell their bodies as prostitutes or lead others to rob banks, but to suggest condoms or bullet-proof vests rather than alternatives to dangerous, degrading behavior is disgusting. Change the conditions that coerce people to such lengths through social programs- rescue women from the lifestyle, not approve it by tossing a few condoms there way and saying, “Here, degrade yourself with these. You might delay some sickness. See how much I care? No bend over for the next stranger with some money.”
Do you really think condoms “help?” These women are degraded whether latex is involved or not, and with the frequency of their sexual encounters and the propensity of such men to insist on unnatural sex acts that lend themselves to disease (i.e. sodomy), all a condom might do is delay the onset of diseases or give false security to the woman being exploited. These women are going to get AIDS and die. They are going to GIVE AIDS to men who are going to give AIDS to women or other men and children. Condoms don’t stop that. It stops only when the behavior stops.
So now, condoms aren’t better than nothing when we’re talking about the degradation of women that supposedly necessitates their use. There is no need for prostitution. There is no need for tools to make something unsafe slightly less unsafe. Giving condoms to prostitutes is like sterilizing the knifes self-mutilators use to cut themselves, because you don’t want them getting an infection. That’s not love. How about getting them real help?
I’ll continue with why condoms are a lie in my next post.
Moreover, condoms are a lie:
Even intact condoms have naturally occurring defects (tiny holes penetrating the entire thickness) measuring five to 50 microns in diameter — 50 to 500 times the size of the HIV virus, writes C. Michael Roland, head of the Polymer Properties Section at the Naval Research laboratory in Washington, D.C. and editor of Rubber Chemistry and Technology, in a published letter to the Washington Times. [In other words, just as rubber tires, over time, lose air, condoms (manufactured of the same product, rubber) also are porous.]
“… the rubber comprising latex condoms has intrinsic voids about 5 microns (0.0002 inches) in size,” Roland states. “Contrarily, the AIDS virus is only 0.1 micron (4 millionths of an inch) in size. Since this is a factor of 50 smaller than the voids inherent in rubber, the virus can readily pass through the condom.” In addition, condom manufacturers allow 0.4 percent of any given batch to be defective, before a recall is ordered.
Studies done by Georgetown Medical University and the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Md., published in Nature, Sept. 1, 1988, show that latex gloves, made to much higher specifications than the condom, have pores 50 times larger than the 0.1 micron HIV virus.
Even if there were no pores in latex, in-use breakage and slip-off rates are “so high as to make condoms ineffective for protection against HIV,” says biochemist and molecular biologist Dr. David G. Collart, Ph.D., of Stone Mountain, Ga.
In fact, “the U.S. government has withdrawn a $2.6 million grant to study condoms because ‘an unacceptably high number of condom users probably would have been infected in such a study,'” he says, citing a 1989 article published in Infection.
…aaaand declining AIDS rates among white gay men has nothing to do with increased condom use, right?
sex work, while risky, serves as a viable source of income for these women. it might be risky, sure, but watch the video–many sex workers have built solidarity around their occupations, and are engaged in important self-advocacy efforts. sex workers are not uniformly oppressed: while certainly not the choice YOU’D make, maybe terrible socioeconomic conditions constrain the choices they make. so while we fix the global economy, i wouldn’t suggest pulling the rug out from beneath women who are telling you, right now, that sex work is providing them with a means for survival. cut the value judgment BS. Sex work might not fit your definition of respectability, but for women across the globe, it means getting enough food to eat.
oh, and guess what? condoms do work, if they don’t have a perfect success rate (mostly due to human error). and comparing sex workers to bank robbers is just insulting.
Jacque and Megan?
Ooohwheee. This oughta be good. Popping the popcorn.
PS
Megan, I had PTSD from my abortion. HAD being the operative word here.
What’s insulting is that you consider self-degradation acceptable and want to legitimize it rather than helping your sisters, because after all, you are not the one enslaved. See, it’s not good enough for you, but you support it for them because it’s “a viable source of income.” There are many sources of income that are unacceptable- dog fighting, being a drug mule. Just because it makes money does not mean that it’s something anyone should do, especially when it’s not just the prostitute that suffers the consequences. Even if it were only these women trapped in this lifestyle by poverty, violence and fear that suffered and died, that’s cause enough. But you will that they stay there (a place you’d never go) and applaud the fact that they’ll be in that Hell a little longer because they’ve managed to delay AIDS through condom use and advocacy groups. And you don’t see how INSULTING that is?
I’m not pulling the rug out from underneath a woman but supporting organizations that help women out of these circumstances. You, rather, are trying to destigmatize the rug that hurts and kills women just because it provides them an income. They are harming themselves and others, and yes, my values do judge that, much like I judge abusive parents and remove kids from their custody. A world where no one has values or acts upon them is a world were women keep being assaulted and abused via prostitution, with those that claim to care about them offering them nothing more than a condom- people like you expecting them to persist in something so horrible that you would never do yourself because you were lucky enough to be born in a better economic climate. That’s not compassionate, Megan. It’s sick. And you dare be insulted by my analogies? Please.
I wouldn’t condemn my values, Megan. I’d get some of your own.
Fake feminism and misplaced, damaging compassion are personal nemeses of mine. I tend to get pretty inflamed by people claiming to help and care for being by participating in their destruction.
Hope I don’t disappoint, Carla. :)
Never. :)
I can’t stop looking at the picture of the young GIRLS in the post. Their eyes are haunting. I cannot imagine the hell they live. If you know of any organizations that help free them could you post the links, Jacque?
I want to help. And not with condoms.
I’ve read upwards of 35% of prostitutes are children.
I support a religious order in the Philippines that rescues these girls. They live on donations and profits from the making and selling of jewelry. I went to my jewelry box and found the pouch that the bracelets I bought for my mom, sister and self came in looking for the card and couldn’t find it. I’ve googled looking for the name of the order and haven’t found it. I’ll keep looking.
See, you keep on going back to the whole slavery them, which is a fallacy. Nobody’s arguing that a prostitute in Southeast Asia has an ideal life, or even a safe occupation–the risk of violence and AIDS is certainly a terrible life prospect. But these women ARE NOT UNIFORMLY OPPRESSED–while certainly presented with limited options, many women chose this profession–meaning they have more autonomy and power than you believe. Women within the sex work sector have begun to ADVOCATE FOR THEMSELVES. Listen to them. Sex worker organizations help women build solidarity amongst themselves, making it easier for them to demand contraceptive use, access to health care, and economies that don’t render women completely marginalized.
NGOs who work with prostitutes obviously don’t think condoms are a panacea–but they are a necessary tool if women are to stay safer and eventually move out of sex work:
“They [NGOs] may work to provide persons in prostitution with new skills essential to moving out of the commercial sex sector, to secure the legal rights of men and women in prostitution to be free from violence and discrimination, or to empower them to demand universal condom use, thereby preventing the further spread of HIV infection within and outside this sector.”
However…
“It is critical to address the dangers associated with prostitution and trafficking in persons. However, current U.S. policies will do little to advance this goal, and will instead exacerbate stigma and discrimination against already marginalized groups. Any anti-prostitution declaration by organizations working in the sex sector has the potential to judge and alienate the very people these organizations seek to assist, making it difficult or impossible to provide services or assistance to those at risk. Public statements against prostitution can also fuel the public opprobrium against men and women in prostitution, further driving them underground and away from lifesaving services.”
If you want to help women leave the sex commercial sex work sector, it must be done delicately. Anti-prostitution policies simply mean that NGOs are limited in the help they can give these women.
http://www.genderhealth.org/pubs/ProstitutionOathImplications.pdf
http://www.genderhealth.org/loyaltyoath.php
Reports about trafficked children and female slaves are often overblown. This doesn’t mean that we don’t respond, but we must realize the issue of sex work is much more nuanced than our moral panic allows us to believe:
“The fact is, these stories of big-hearted women who get tricked by boyfriends into prostitution make good drama precisely because they are outliers. That doesn’t mean trafficking doesn’t exist, or even that it is negligible. It doesn’t mean we don’t need to respond. But we need to respond in a way that makes it possible to help those who need help most.Pushing the sex trade further underground does not achieve that goal. We need to make a clear distinction between those who really need help and the vast majority of men and women who sell sex for the same reason that men and women sell hamburgers, footballing skills or yen-euro futures – because it pays the rent.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/21/policing-bill-sex-workers
…and for the record, I find it laudable that organizations can help women move beyond sex work, as is the case with your jewelry makers. Giving women microloans and supporting cottage industries are steps in the right direction.
If you want to help women leave the sex commercial sex work sector, it must be done delicately. Anti-prostitution policies simply mean that NGOs are limited in the help they can give these women.
Validate and legitimize something in order to eradicate it? Not only is that counter-productive, it’s also downright evil. The ends don’t justify the means, especially considering the prevalence INCREASES when there are no government sanctions. The government has a viable interest in the protection of its citizens and in public health and unchecked prostitution assaults BOTH those interests.
Furthermore, something that should not exist should be not exalted. Just because we can’t stop someone from being self-destructive doesn’t mean we should aid them in it. Something that should not be happening shouldn’t be brazen enough to happen in the daylight.
The bottom line is, when a WAY OUT is offered, women take it or leave it. Look at organizations that don’t throw condoms at girls and instead provide shelter, job training, education, etc. In America for example, those in the sex industry that prefer the money or the drugs money buys or the attention of the sex industry will stay in it. Those that want to leave will take the way out and leave. An organization that I donate to who does an amazing job of this is the Pink Cross at thepinkcross.org. The sad truth is that those who stay are typically molested children (upwards of 80%) and being violated in the only thing that feels normal and being wanted for their bodies is the only love they know. They are also slaves to drugs in order to do the work and slaves to the work in order to buy the drugs. So as for your NOT UNIFORMLY OPPRESSED argument, even prostitutes in this land of opportunity and equality are still shackled. Just because something is done of free will does not mean that the doer is not still a victim.
1. Big-hearted woman tricked by boyfriend into prostitution.
2. Playboy centerfold who sees their is much money to be had as an “escort” and commands $25,000 a night from men like Tiger Woods.
3. Child runaway/throw-away that can get 5 bucks for a hamburger for sex with a stranger.
4. Girl raised in the family brothel who is expected to contribute to the family selling sex.
5. Woman who sells her virginity on Ebay to finance her education.
6. Trafficked woman, chloroformed on vacation and sold into slavery.
7. Single mom with a child to feed sells herself on Craigslist so she and junior won’t get evicted.
I’d argue that no matter the story- the forced girls that get your sympathy, those coerced by financial hardship, the greedy, to those who simply lacks the natural esteem to protect her body and sees it as something to be sold- I don’t care the circumstance, nothing makes prostitution more or less acceptable. The celebrity “escort” that finances a lavish lifestyle vs. the single mom on hard times vs. the enslaved woman- yes, the stories are differing degrees of sad, but the bottom line is, they are ALL sad.
So trying to convince me that enslavement is not the norm doesn’t change my viewpoint that alternatives should be offered to everyone. While the expensive centerfold is unlikely to take me up on GED classes, the offer stands. Whatever circumstances lead a women to sell her dignity even if it’s laziness or pure greed, can’t we admit that it is a sign that something is wrong?
“Look at organizations that don’t throw condoms at girls…”
Clearly you were too blinded by your moral fury that you didn’t read the quotations or article I posted. NGOs that help prostitutes don’t just “throw condoms” at them. I don’t think you’ll find anybody in public health who wouldn’t advocate for a comprehensive effort: helping sex workers find access to housing, health care, and other means of supporting themselves IN ADDITION TO access to contraception.
You said it yourself: condoms delay (prevent) contraction of HIV. Until you can provide a viable, safer living for sex workers across the globe, then discouraging condom distribution will only result in more AIDS cases.
“In America for example, those in the sex industry that prefer the money or the drugs money buys or the attention of the sex industry will stay in it.”
The “attention of the sex industry,” hahaha. As if prostitution were some part of the mainstream commercial market. Most sex work takes place underground, and many people wouldn’t consider their primary occupation to be sex work. A lot of sex work is both informal, and not necessarily a stranger-stranger type of transaction. Working in a major city at a reproductive rights center, I met women who would trade sex with male acquaintances for rides to places, or money to buy food for their kids. Doesn’t sound like sex workers are all drug-dependent and craving porn stardom (though drug use and physical abuse are often associated with poverty). Maybe instead of demonizing, stigmatizing and criminalizing sex workers, we should start talking about poverty, and the ways recent policymaking has contributed to the decay of major urban centers (resulting in increased poverty).
Jacqueline,
I think you’re missing the point. We don’t want women to “persist in” something unsafe and dangerous. Besides our calls for economic reform and efforts to help sex workers find jobs, housing, health care, etc., we also provide them with the tools they need to be safe UNTIL ANOTHER OPTION IS AVAILABLE.
Also, I don’t see why there is anything INHERENTLY degrading about sex work. It’s difficult to conceive of sex as anything but a) an expression of love and b) procreative. Why consider it different than any other form of manual labor (a construction job, let’s say), if various precautions are taken to ensure one’s safety? The problems, though, are the conditions UNDER WHICH sex work typically happens. You’re right, Jacqueline–sex work isn’t typically a happy profession, because women are at a direct risk of violence and contracting a dangerous disease. Sex work is an occupation riddled with terrible gender disparities: violence against women, limited ability to advocate for oneself, and a one-sided market (meaning it’s considered more acceptable for WOMEN to sell sex to MEN, but not vice versa). These conditions make most sex work terribly unsafe. It would be a good idea to stop with the value judgments and attaching moral connotations to sex work, because these tendencies tend to stigmatize prostitutes and make them less likely to reach out for help when they need it.
I don’t think you’ll find anybody in public health who wouldn’t advocate for a comprehensive effort: helping sex workers find access to housing, health care, and other means of supporting themselves IN ADDITION TO access to contraception.
And it’s the contraception aspect of the comprehensiveness that is counterproductive. It’s like teaching kids abstinence PLUS contraception. Abstinence does not require contraception. Leaving prostitution does not require sex. Both undermine the message and encourage the exact behavior we seek to stop.
It’s this offensive idea that prostitutes have to whore themselves up on their feet (i.e. “work” there way through a GED program turning tricks). That’s not what I support. I support an immediate WAY OUT like we social workers do with battered women. Take a police officer to the house and have her grab everything she needs in 15 minutes- because she’s not coming back. No where would I suggest a battered woman wearing an extra sweater to soften the blows until she finishes school and can support herself. Screw that. She can finish school in transitional housing where she won’t be beaten). In short, a respectable NGO would have no need for condoms anymore than a respectable rehab would keep a heroin addict in clean needles until he’s “recovered”.
You said it yourself: condoms delay (prevent) contraction of HIV.
Potentially. Latex inhibits bodily fluids from touching to a certain degree- but any inhibition is lost when we consider the frequency of sex these women have. Have sex once with a stranger: One chance of HIV. Have sex with two strangers: you’ve DOUBLED that risk. So a girl that has 50 chances of getting HIV any given month who uses condoms is statistically still more likely to get AIDS than the girl who had a one-night stand with no condom. Plus, we know those men that had sex with a prostitute has sex with prostitutes, meaning the men these women service are more likely to be infected.
Look at it this way: I can wear a poncho once in the rain for 15 minutes and might stay modestly dry. These women are in the rain constantly, where slippage, breakage and natural malfunction not to mention untrustworthy men who have the physical advantage over these girls seriously inhibit any benefits. Rates indicate that people that have that much promiscuous sex are going to get ill.
The “attention of the sex industry,” hahaha.
I was referring to porn stars, 75-90% of which have also prostituted themselves. And those who leave will admit that they were desperate for love and the attention they could get from “performing” was a substitute for that.
Working in a major city at a reproductive rights center
You protected people’s “right” to be destructive with their reproductive organs. How rewarding that must be! Everything you saw was a perversion and misuse of sexuality, the fruit of which are diseases, abandoned children, abortion, heartache, depression, substance abuse and so on. Have you considered that all of the filth you assist these people in subjecting themselves to is completely optional?
I met women who would trade sex with male acquaintances for rides to places, or money to buy food for their kids.
And your providing chemicals and STD tests and abortions helped these women how? Real charities have bus passes and referrals for food stamps. You have condoms and will take hundreds of dollars from a woman to kill the child and give her nothing in return except maybe a month’s supply of birth control pills. Instead, you take her bus pass and grocery money and put her back on the street, bleeding. How is that love?
Maybe instead of demonizing, stigmatizing and criminalizing sex workers, we should start talking about poverty, and the ways recent policymaking has contributed to the decay of major urban centers (resulting in increased poverty).
I don’t harm sex workers- I HELP them. You want their exploitation to persist out of some misguided and perverted attempts at understand. You clearly don’t understand. Prostitution is such a horrible thing, NO WOMAN SHOULD ENDURE IT. She might choose to, but unlike you, I won’t aid her in her destruction.
And I’m sure talking about poverty would be an easier topic for you than continuing to justify the abuse of women. But if you want, chew on this: Sexual immorality is not a consequence of poverty. Sexual morality is typically the CAUSE of poverty. That is how they are correlated.
I think you’re missing the point. We don’t want women to “persist in” something unsafe and dangerous. Besides our calls for economic reform and efforts to help sex workers find jobs, housing, health care, etc., we also provide them with the tools they need to be safe UNTIL ANOTHER OPTION IS AVAILABLE.
No matter what you do, prostitution is always unsafe and dangerous. Validating it as “just another profession” like construction work, as you say, doesn’t change this fact. And that last line has two wicked lies in it: The lie that “tools” make it safe (Most prostitutes have incurable STD’s that condoms don’t prevent and also- a condom never protected a prostitute from having her throat slit.) And the lie that they have to keep prostituting until another option is available. So you support organizations that only have so many slots and the rest have to keep prostituting (with condoms) until another circumstance presents itself? I posted my last response after yours- but this idea of having to wait to STOP doing something dangerous is a lie. If it’s sell or starve while the NGO just gives you a condom, therein again is my problem with these organizations you support.
Also, I don’t see why there is anything INHERENTLY degrading about sex work.
Would you ever do it? Even if you wouldn’t get sick or killed, would you ever do it?
There is a reason why most women would never be a prostitute and would be offended to accused of being one- and no, it’s not because of a stigma. In spite of women that have sex with strangers for free, even those women would be offended if the man offered to pay.
Sex work is an occupation riddled with terrible gender disparities: violence against women, limited ability to advocate for oneself, and a one-sided market (meaning it’s considered more acceptable for WOMEN to sell sex to MEN, but not vice versa). These conditions make most sex work terribly unsafe.
Um, no. It’s not limited advocacy and a one-sided market and all that pseudo-intellectual crap that makes prostitution unsafe. Even if men did it the same as women and hookers had UNIONS, there is still a host of STDs and the fact that men typically weigh more and have more muscle than women and can easily overpower them. There is no way to make something perverted into something safe and acceptable.
It would be a good idea to stop with the value judgments and attaching moral connotations to sex work
Certain things aren’t imbued with value- they have natural value. So sex is not sacred and precious and not for sale because I think so, but because it is. People have natural modesty. It goes against our instincts to even allow someone to see us naked. Like people would rightly judge a mother that abandons a child in a garbage can as an affront to nature to moral values, prostitution will always be viewed as shameful because it is. Sex has value because it is an expression of love and the means of procreation. There is a reason why humans don’t have sex in public like animals-it’s because of it’s nature. It’s naturally holy, in spite of its perversions. It has value.
I’m realize that I’m saying this to a person who thinks that human beings are only worth anything if the mother carrying them says so, but certain things are precious whether others recognize that or not.
And yes, I do have moral fury. The exploitation/degradation and abuse of women infuriates me.
I am even upset for women that choose to do it without duress as there are still consequences for their behavior. Only a woman is heavily coerced or has been greatly wronged would submit herself to such degradation. No woman with an accurate understanding of her self-worth would freely choose to do this.
Yes, I judge the act as wrong but help the people that do it to stop, so they won’t suffer anymore. You don’t judge the act, perhaps as a way to actually avoid helping those that do it. I don’t buy your whole, “My not judging is because I’m so understanding or their situation and I want them to be more likely to come to us for help” argument. Prostitution hurts people. It should stop.
If the abuse of women doesn’t rightfully enrage you (and apparently it doesn’t), you are welcome to some of my moral fury. There is plenty to go around.
Some issues:
1. “She might choose to, but unlike you, I won’t aid her in her destruction.”
Hm, a contradiction. I thought all prostitutes were slaves in need of liberation? When did this issue of choice come into play?
2. “And your providing chemicals and STD tests and abortions helped these women how?”
Hm, well, reproductive rights means the right to bodily sovereignty and self determination–made possible by social and economic empowerment. We advocated for both on a policy level, and also did direct community outreach: helping poor pregnant women secure WIC benefits, find decent jobs, navigate family court, and apply to college.
“If it’s sell or starve while the NGO just gives you a condom, therein again is my problem with these organizations you support.”
-Foreign NGOs receive limited funding, and do the best they can under the circumstances (which typically means relying on a tight-fisted govt. to cough up the funds). I don’t think you can get it around your head that organizations supporting sex work are also engaged in real community outreach and policywork besides simply “handing out condoms.” But we’re talking about economic empowerment here, and unless large-scale structural changes take place, then people will still be marginalized. The US is in tough economic time right now–do we think it’s the sole responsibility of the third sector (nonprofits, NGOs, etc) to provide jobs for everybody who got laid off?
3. See, there’s this thing in public health called “harm reduction.” We can punish people for doing things we think are morally wrong and cut them off at the knees, or we can advocate for harm reduction and gradually end their dependence on these “bad habits” while working to enact better policies. Condoms and, yes, clean needles are essential.
4. Abstinence-only education doesn’t work. The Bush Administration commissioned a nonpartisan research organization, the Mathematica Institute, to evaluate their effectiveness–much to Bushy’s chagrin, these programs DO NOT WORK (while comprehensive sex ed DOES).
Did you read anything I posted? When criminalized, sex work GOES UNDERGROUND. “I don’t buy your whole, “My not judging is because I’m so understanding or their situation and I want them to be more likely to come to us for help” argument.”
Hm, what makes you think a prostitute would seek you out for help if you consider (and treat her) like she’s morally and physically degraded? Everybody loves a healthy dose of stigmatization, right?
Check out a recent epidemiological study on sex work in Vancouver, “Structural and Environmental Barriers to Condom Use Negotiation With Clients Among Female Sex Workers: Implications for HIV-Prevention Strategies and Policy.”
“Government policies that prohibit solicitation
in public spaces, including those in North
America, the United Kingdom, and parts of
Australia, have been shown to increase police
presence and crackdowns and to displace
street-based sex-work markets to outlying
areas.16,17,21As a direct result of displacement
and legal restrictions on working indoors in
managed or supported settings, more marginalized
sex workers are pushed to work in dark and
deserted alleys and isolated spaces with limited
lighting, poor sanitation, lack of protections from violence and exploitation, and reduced access to health and social support services.”
Some issues with your reading comprehension:
Hm, a contradiction. I thought all prostitutes were slaves in need of liberation? When did this issue of choice come into play?
No contradiction. I clearly state that all women in this situation, to some degree, need help. I even made you a LIST. If you aren’t going to read what I write, I won’t indulge you by writing.
Hm, well, reproductive rights means the right to bodily sovereignty and self determination–made possible by social and economic empowerment.
Wow. I actually think you believe that- that I can’t control my body without chemicals and hormones and surgeries. I am sovereign over my body. Hence why I don’t NEED any of those things. And as for my child that I would conceive and carry- I’m her guardian to make sure her body stays sovereign and no one attacks it with a suction machine.
We advocated for both on a policy level, and also did direct community outreach: helping poor pregnant women secure WIC benefits, find decent jobs, navigate family court, and apply to college.
I don’t believe you. You might have referred to organizations that do this- but provide it yourself? I don’t think so.
But we’re talking about economic empowerment here, and unless large-scale structural changes take place, then people will still be marginalized.
I’m talking about direct services here, not policy changes with hopes that environments will change. I work in policy, but that doesn’t mean I neglect those suffering in the meantime. In fact, my bill to fix healthcare in Texas was being heard at the exact same time that a patient needed a transfer to avoid euthanasia. I didn’t ignore him to advocate for the bill that would save so many- we divided and conquered. So while policy reform has it’s place, that’s not what I’m talking about here.
See, there’s this thing in public health called “harm reduction.” We can punish people for doing things we think are morally wrong and cut them off at the knees, or we can advocate for harm reduction and gradually end their dependence on these “bad habits” while working to enact better policies. Condoms and, yes, clean needles are essential.
Thanks for trying to school me on harm reduction. I covered harm reduction long before you entered this conversation. Ctrl-F and type harm reduction and you’ll see what I said. It’s crap. In fact, I spent a semester in an MPH (Master of Public Health) class arguing research with the masters students about its dangerous and ineffective precedence. (BTW, I’m an MSSW. I took the MPH classes as a part of my minor in my Ph.D, but I know enough MPH stuff that I don’t require vocabulary lessons).
Abstinence-only education doesn’t work. The Bush Administration commissioned a nonpartisan research organization, the Mathematica Institute, to evaluate their effectiveness–much to Bushy’s chagrin, these programs DO NOT WORK (while comprehensive sex ed DOES)
I evaluate 2.4 million worth of abstinence-only education and 92.5% of students that pledge abstinence kept their pledges for 6 months or longer. This is research I DID in NOVEMBER. I have a year’s worth of data so far.
But I’ll just humor you- let’s say abstinence ed is a failure. How do you explain 40 years of comprehensive sex ed and rising teen pregnancy/STD rates? Shouldn’t your approach have fixed things by now? Comprehensive sex ed and the expectation for kids to have sex has caused an epidemic where 50% of kids will have an STD by the time they are 25.
If comprehensive sex ed worked, things would be getting better, not worse. But I know better. Abortion-advocates have made it clear that sex ed is how they ensure more abortions. In fact, that’s the answer Alan Guttmacher gave right after Roe when he was asked how to guarentee a future of legal abortion. He said two words “Sex education.”
Did you read anything I posted? When criminalized, sex work GOES UNDERGROUND.
I addressed this. Did you read anything I posted?
Here it is again:
“Validate and legitimize something in order to eradicate it? Not only is that counter-productive, it’s also downright evil. The ends don’t justify the means, especially considering the prevalence INCREASES when there are no government sanctions. The government has a viable interest in the protection of its citizens and in public health and unchecked prostitution assaults BOTH those interests.
Furthermore, something that should not exist should be not exalted. Just because we can’t stop someone from being self-destructive doesn’t mean we should aid them in it. Something that should not be happening shouldn’t be brazen enough to happen in the daylight.”
Once again, I’m talking to someone who believes that women should be able to kill their babies legally so that killing the child is safer for the mother.
What’s next? Legalizing child abuse so parents won’t be afraid to get treatment for the injuries they caused their child? After all, we don’t want child abuse going UNDERGROUND, do we?
Go Jacqueline!! I’m with Carla, I took a seat and grabbed some caramel corn to watch this match. I am so glad you stopped by to chat. I wanted to puke after reading Megan’s crap about “seeing nothing wrong with” being a hooker while she is trying to “sanitize” prostitution by talking about how “sex workers” just need to unionize. Then again I guess we should not be suprized by anything a person says who justifies “women should be able to kill their babies legally so that child-killing is safer for the mother”. WOW! Is that sick or what?
if comprehensive sex ed works, why are there 1 Million Abortions every year? And why are at least 95% of those used as BIRTH CONTROL? Why will at least 1 in 4 young adults contract an STD by the time they are in their 20s?
And prostitution is disgusting. Its degrading to women and it allows men to treat them as sex objects.
You’re sweet, Miss L. Thanks for the encouragement. Isn’t it intriguing that those that strive so hard to make sex “value free” in order to justify perverting it still won’t do certain things themselves? It tells me that people recognize the natural law of sex whether they dispute it or not.
if comprehensive sex ed works, why are there 1 Million Abortions every year?
I agree, Liz! There are a million abortions because sex ed does work as intended- it was intended to fuel the abortion industry by breaking down natural modesty and values about sex and separating sex from babies. What it doesn’t do is reduce teen pregnancies and STDs which is what people like Megan claim it does.
“I don’t believe you. You might have referred to organizations that do this- but provide it yourself? I don’t think so.”
That’s mature, and false. What I’ve said flies in the face of everything you believe pro-choicers to be. Discrediting what I say, though, enables you to keep making gross caricatures.
“I’m talking about direct services here, not policy changes with hopes that environments will change.”
I AM talking about direct services and policy changes. Foreign NGOs providing aid to sex workers a) offer direct services to these women (so they can stay safe, i.e. not contract AIDS, until they can move on to a different line of work) and b) advocate for national-and international- level policy changes to empower economically marginalized individuals. How do you suggest NGOs provide these women with jobs if there aren’t larger structural changes made? Do jobs just come out of the ether? Does NGO funding come out of the ether?
“If comprehensive sex ed worked, things would be getting better, not worse. But I know better.”
Well, this statement isn’t valid, since abstinence-only education has been the precedent for the last twenty years or so, starting way back with the Adolescent Family Life Act, extending to TANF, and beyond. There haven’t been federal funding streams for comprehensive sex education, but tons of money has been funneled into abstinence-only programs.
Anybody making policy recommendations needs to take into consideration major studies contradicting their claims. What do you make of the Mathematica Institute study, which states, “The findings show [abstinence-only programs have] no significant impact on teen sexual activity, no differences in rates of unprotected sex, and some impacts on knowledge of STDs and perceived effectiveness of condoms and birth control pills.”
http://www.mathematica-mpr.com/publications/SearchList2.aspx?jumpsrch=yes&txtSearch=abstinence
Or the Peter Bearman and Hannah Bruckman (Columbia University) report that found virginity pledge programs helped delay sexual activity among participants by about six months, but once kids STARTED BECOMING SEXUALLY ACTIVE, were less likely to use contraception?
Six months is coming up for your “study,” eh? You might want to conduct a followup to that baseline.