For Cara at the F-Word

I would jump into the comment thread over there on Laura Woodhouse's article about the ass-haberdashery of Jacqui Smith and the Home Office. But I've been trying to ween off comment threads as they have drove me batty of late. It's a bit of a New Year's Resolution of mine. So I answer back here. Anyway, this one poster, Cara, really pisses me off. To wit, she says about sex worker unions like IUSW and ECP:

Caroline - oooh, yes, a union for the protection of pimps and other abusers, how convincing.

Right. When do unions EVER protect any sort of abuser whether one calls them a pimp, supervisor or management in any capacity? You obviously lack basic comprehension in what a union is. It's like saying the UAW is a front for the multi-billion dollar earning auto execs. Considering the law does half of the abusing, most of the pimps work is done. What, pray tell, would they need a union for Cara? Furthermore, how insulting are you, Cara? Is it so difficult for you to accept that women can stand up for their own rights? Let me rephrase that, is it so difficult for you to accept that whores can stand up for their own rights? Your flip comment is very telling of your views about prostitutes, most strikingly that you probably don't think any of them are smart enough or aware enough to organize or love themselves enough to protest against the abuses on the job.

After all, it's a job they're supposed to hate right? That's what's giving you the trouble. Again, it's the Catch-22 folks put on the sex industry. Finally, she addresses the prostitution=male entitlement canard sung by many people, even some sex workers, that is so damned tired. Yes. Some men will think this. But as I've explained before, people who have problems with entitlement want things given to them for (pay attention Cara, et al.)....

FREE!

Payment doesn't denote entitlement or carte blanche access. Anyone who doesn't understand this has serious mental issues. I've gone on about this in previous threads. Paying for a service, sexual or not, does not give one permission to abuse and misuse. What is so difficult to understand?

Then she says:

Making sex work acceptable would only reduce their chances of getting out, hey, nothing wrong with sex work, so it's easy to say there's nothing wrong with drug addicted, vulnerable women being trafficked, or exploited. Seeing sex work as acceptable makes it easier to be blind to women who are not willingly doing this work.

Oh logic is not your friend, Cara. Let's look at some situations that are perfectly acceptable that contain abuses under certain conditions but are not universal.

1. Marriage is acceptable, and definitely expected, in our culture. So, using your logic, then it's acceptability makes it okay for spouses (primarily women) to be beaten and raped when they don't perform their "wifely duties".

2. Children cannot legally work but for one exception I can think of off the top of my head: the entertainment industry. Children cannot work in factories, on farms or as servants in a household (like they used to before the laws changed) but they can sing and dance and act to entertain the lot of us. However, there are very set, strictly enforced laws regarding children in the entertainment industry, how long they can be on set working, the role of the guardian, etc. They MUST spend so many hours in a day and week with a set tutor. But using your logic, because this form of child labor is accepted and even celebrated (ie. actresses like Dakota Fanning and Tatum O'Neal receiving Oscars, singers like the Jackson 5 receiving Grammys at minor ages), that means it's okay for them to be abused. There are PLENTY of child performers who are exploited by their parents, by their agents, etc. Ask Lindsey Lohan. Ask Brooke Shields. Ask Michael Jackson and his siblings.

But let's take your tack, Cara. No more child performers because stage parents and greedy agents could exploit them. Goodbye Hannah Montana, Jonas Brothers, Disney Channel, American Idol, any Harry Potter actors who are still underage, the child cast of the Chronicles of Narnia and other "family friendly" entertainment that is preferred over that nasty, evil pornography, etc. Child labor in entertainment is very normalized and it is rare to see a drama, comedy, film, television, etc. that don't have a minor on there whether they are newborn or almost of majority age.

3. Farming, harvesting, serving as a nanny and all those other "menial" jobs slaves performed in the American colonial period in the South AND the North. All of these jobs are normalized now but does that mean slavery can be reinstituted? Oh yeah, and many more people of all genders and ages are trafficked into these jobs than sex slavery. I hope you care about them too.

I find Cara's mindset disturbing. That whole casual link between normalization and abuse with regard to prostitution and pornography (which she's probably against as well). That she will not listen to the objections from the sex workers themselves, always crediting anything that doesn't shout, "LET ME OUT!", to pimps and abusers means that she does not care one wit about abuses. That is a smoke screen to give her, "icky sex worker!" argument better legs. If she actually said that then she would be written off. Instead she frames it behind a veil of so-called concern. Please. Acceptance does not include abuse and only a mentally disturbed person would think that.

This is reminiscent of holy rollers who worried that the normalization of pre-marital sex will condone all sorts of things like rape, abuse of the body and disrespect of women and the disrespect of marriage. They say the same about the normalization of abortion, homosexuality, masturbation and hey! Can Cara see the underlying commonality here? It's about who gets to control your body. The person themselves or the guardians of the state? Those who participate in these activities seen by various numbers of "upstanding, righteous, moral citizens" never do near as much abuse as their opposition. Remember: psychos like Gary Ridgway and Steve Wright set out to pick up prostitutes to kill them, not to pay them for services and both were seen as "upstanding citizens" and thought they were doing society a favor with their horrid crimes. I'm sure they'd be commenting on these threads claiming some of the same crap folks like Cara too and unfortunately, future versions of those men may already have.

And the claim, "Making sex work acceptible would only reduces their chances of getting out" is so stupid, I can't believe she seriously typed that. Again, holding to her logic, no one would ever be able to leave ANY legal and accepted line of work. But people do it all the time. Furthermore, for women who DO want to get out of prostitution and get a 'straight' job, taking away any criminal charges goes a long way to easing that transition. I'm guessing Cara is one of those people who think employers are being honest when they claim that "previous convictions does not automatically disqualify an applicant from employment consideration". Grab some reality, Cara.

More on this later.