Sex In The Public Square - Another irresponsible piece on sex work - Comments

Julie Bindel's articles in UK are even worse

RonWeitzer — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 15:27:35 -0800

If you haven't seen the series of op-eds and apparent "news" articles written by Julie Bindel, in The Guardian (UK), her writings are much worse than Bob Herberts.

Not a place for rumors

Elizabeth — Mon, 17 Sep 2007 05:16:36 -0700

This is a place for open discussion but not a place for rumor-mongering. We encourage people to disagree and debate and challenge each other, but it is important that those debates and challenges be grounded in reasoning and evidence.

Raising questions without answers is fine, hinting at rumors is not.

One of the reasons we encourage people to register and sign in, or to at least leave a link that leads back to some other place where they write or have a profile is so that we can get to know each other as a community of people who are all acting in good faith regardless of our differences.

Sorry, the Weitzer thing is

Visitorr — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 20:08:10 -0700

Sorry, the Weitzer thing is a rumor heard from a fellow worker. I don't want me or you to get sued. I'm just saying keep your eyes open.

Weitzer's research

alex dumas — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 12:09:34 -0700

Yes, "Visitor", I'm also curious what you mean by Weitzer's "preferences." If you only read Weitzer's articles before you engage in character association, you might get enlightened (email him at GWU and he will send you his work). I would think that you, and others in this community, would appreciate researchers like Weitzer who have continually challenged (in several publications) the flawed and ideological writings of Farley, Hughes, Raymond, etc. Instead, you prefer to engage in an unwarranted attack on him. Mindblowing!!!

The links

Elizabeth — Sun, 16 Sep 2007 07:07:37 -0700

I tried fixing the links in Iamcuriousblue's comment itself but couldn't get the system to let me save the edited version, I think because IACB wasn't logged in when he made the comment. (I kept being asked for a "valid author." So, IACB, if you get back here and feel like registering, that'd be really cool. We'd love to have you on board anyway!)

Meanwhile, here are the links to the sources and resources he mentioned:

Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women and their report "Trafficking: A Demand Led Problem?" ("excellent overview of the multifaceted nature of the sex industry and the relationship of sex trafficking to parts of that industry")

Coalition Against Trafficking in Women, NGO that takes an prohibitionist position on prostitution and supports US funding policies tha deny aid to any organization, even outside the US, that does not actively oppose prostitution.

The Mother Jones article that gives lots of good info on the US aid policies, and the issue of trafficking "Sex Trafficking: Zero Tolerance".

La Strada Association, "one of the main groups doing actual work on the ground in Eastern Europe trying to help trafficked women there."

I'll add the organizations mentioned to our links page. I need to create a category for reports and studies, I think!

Thank You Iamcuriousblue, Would you mind

JanieBelle — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 18:53:44 -0700

if I fixed the links in your comment? I really appreciate the info, and of course when I finish the piece it'll be cross-posted here.

Another organization that

Iamcuriousblue — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 18:46:36 -0700

Another organization that clearly makes this distinction is the NGO Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women. Their report "Trafficking: A Demand Led Problem?" is excellent overview of the multifaceted nature of the sex industry and the relationship of sex trafficking to parts of that industry.

The positions of GAATW are, naturally, opposed by the abolitionist NGO Coalition Against Trafficking in Women, which has managed to get them largely cut off from any US-based government funding based on their non-abolitionist stance on prostitution. The Mother Jones article Sex Trafficking: Zero Tolerance" gives more info about this.

One of the member groups of the GAATW, the La Strada Association, is one of the main groups doing actual work on the ground in Eastern Europe trying to help trafficked women there.

"Preferences?"

Chris — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 02:39:09 -0700

Do you think that you could be more specific about these "preferences" in a non-libelous way, preferably with a link or two?

Really, Weitzer?

Visitorr — Sat, 15 Sep 2007 01:30:17 -0700

Maybe I'm thinking of someone else, but isn't Weitzer the sociologist at GWU who has certain "preferences" that we really wouln't want to be associated with? I'd be careful of promoting him. Word up.

Blog-in

Elizabeth — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 19:35:01 -0700

Thanks Iamcuriousblue ... I'll put up a Sex Act(ivism) piece about the blog in. I hope we'll see you around here again!

Bound Not Gagged blog-in

Iamcuriousblue — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 15:32:46 -0700

First, just wanted to thank Elizabeth for her excellent fisking of the Herbert op-ed.

Second, I wanted to tell you about this blog-in at the sex worker blog, Bound Not Gagged in response to Farley's latest nonsense:

http://www.scapa-lv.org/whats_hot/lv_call_to_action.htm

Third, I wanted to point out to an absolutely excellent article by Ronald Weitzer on the current moral crusade against prostitution:

R. Weitzer. The Social Construction of Sex Trafficking: Ideology and Institutionalization of a Moral Crusade. Politics & Society, September 1, 2007; 35(3): 447–475.

What is degrading is to

Visitornumber7 — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 14:20:13 -0700

What is degrading is to actually sell access to your body and vagina. I am amazed by the amount of denial here. I can only guess it is either a coping skill, or these posts are being written by pimps whose women are out there "degrading" themselves.

Herbert part 3 -- Nonsequitors: baseball bats and blowjobs

Elizabeth — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 13:58:07 -0700

In Herbert's third piece on prostitution in Nevada's brothels he reports on being threatened with a baseball bat by the Mayor of Las Vegas (where there are no legal brothels) and jumps into an attept to take on those "more thoughtful" among us who would argue for a legalizing or decriminalizing of prostitution:

A lot of people more thoughtful than Oscar Goodman believe that prostitution should be legalized as a way of protecting and empowering the women who go into the sex trade. I’ve lost patience with those arguments, however well meaning. Real-world prostitution, in whatever guise, bears no resemblance at all to the empowerment fantasies of prostitution proponents. I have never seen such vulnerable, powerless women as those in the sex trade, legal or illegal.

I don't know many sex worker advocates who have "empowerment fantasies" about prostitution. I don't know a lot of them who would tell young women, "You know, you want a really empowering career? Become a prostitute." No, the sex worker advocates I know have a more complex analysis of the industry, seeing prostitution as somethng that can, at times, feel empowering, but that is more often a very difficult job. Still, Herbert wants to demonstrate that legalized prostitution can only be degrading, and this is what he dredges up to prove his point:

And if you don’t think legalized prostitution is about degradation, consider the “date room” at Sheri’s. That’s a small room where a quiet dinner for two can be served. Beneath the tiny table is a couple of towels and a cushion for the woman to kneel on.

It seems like a nonsequitor. Is Herbert suggesting that it is automatically degrading to give a man a blow job while he's eating dinner? That no woman could want to perform such an act as part of a scene? Because he offers that bit of information with absolutely no other explanation. It is just somehow evidence that "legalized prostitution is about degredation." There is a sentence in this piece that begins to sound like the Bob Herbert whose pieces I've tended to like in the past:

"As a society, we should be offering help to the many thousands of women who would like to escape prostitution, and providing alternatives to those in danger of being pulled into it."

We should be offering help to the many thousands of workers who would like to escape all kinds of exploitive work. We should be offering alternatives to all kinds of vulnerable people who are struggling to make ends meet. And we should be working at creating an economy that doesn't depend on the exploitation of workers and doesn't create such dramatic inequality in the first place.

If you have Times Select subscription you can see the entire article, "Fantasies, Well Meant," here. it was published on Sept. 11, 2007.

And it seems especially

Elizabeth — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 08:23:24 -0700

And it seems especially awful when that sort of degrading language is used by people who believe that what they're doing is helpful.

Degrading

JanieBelle — Fri, 14 Sep 2007 05:02:53 -0700

They are indeed. That very degredation is part of why it's so easy for most people to dismiss them. If they're thought of as somehow less than human, then it's more comfortable to not think of them, not care about them, and dismiss them.

That has to change.

Welcome to SitPS Holly.

Another irresponsible piece on sex work

Elizabeth — Sun, 09 Sep 2007 00:55:49 -0700

I'm trying to decide what makes me maddest about Bob Herbert's recent op-ed pieces about sex work in Las Vegas.

It might be his use of a tug-on-your-heartstrings story and alarmist title in today's piece, "Escape from Las Vegas." In that piece he uses Amber, a 19 year old with a disabled mother and an abusive and drug addicted step father, who finds herself stripping in Las Vegas as representative of all sex workers: