Blame It On The Dirty Prostitutes
Bruce Edwards | The Flint Journal
According to the FlintJournal this sign was posted by Sherrie Lynn and Russ Palmer, "after watching drug dealers and prostitutes doing business on the street and finding hypodermic needles and condoms left in their yard."
"We don't want it here," said Sherrie Lynn Palmer, 48. "There's a lot of really good people around here. I don't want to sit here and let the crime fester. It all starts with the prostitutes. It brings everything else. We don't want it here. There's a lot of really good people around here. "
So, if you happen to work in the sex-trade you are automatically a "bad person". Good to know, I'll keep that in mind when I try to ignore all the reasons why prostitutes are considered spoiled identities. I'll try to forget that society engages in slut shamming on a daily basis. I'll try to forget the economic inequality that leads some women into this choice, and while I'm at it, I will just ignore the fact that some women choose this as a viable career, because what is the point of validating female agency in a patriarchal world anyway?
I personally love the way that women are blamed for running down the neighbourhood. It certainly could not be the fault of the predatory johns could it? Men cannot be taken to task for their sexual proclivities because well, they are men isn't it obvious? The men are the ones wearing the condoms but the inappropriate disposal is the fault of the prostitute.
You know what I find interesting, men by far exist in a privileged position in this world and yet they are assigned responsibility for very little. Women who exist as marginalized bodies with limited access to power are to blame for everything. Does anyone not see something slightly off about this way of ordering society? Power with out responsibility would never be deemed acceptable in the business world where money is at risk, but when it comes to our social discourse we blindly give men a free pass without forcing them to own any of their privileges.
One of the major incidents that offended Ms. Palmer was being mistaken for a prostitute as she walked her dog. Nope don't want to be confused and accidentally taken for a bad girl. After all the effort of making sure her vagina is pure and sacrosanct, imagine the horror of being confused with a dirty slut...Again who are the ones approaching her...that would be the MEN. Who are the ones making her feel like less than because she walked out of the house with a vagina between her legs...aaah once again that would be the MEN. So she can put up all the signs she wants directed at shaming the dirty sluts out of her precious little neighbourhood, but until as a society we decide to deal with predatory MALE behaviour I'm afraid she is going to have to deal with being mistaken for a dirty prostitute...BTW I can think of a whole list of things I would be more offended by, like pedophile, rapist, murderer... the prostitutes hurts no one and that is something that should be remembered before we make a push to rush them off of our streets in an effort to sanitize the neighbourhood.
Submit This Article!
33 comments :
I have always believed that prostitution should be legal. Make it legal, tax it and regulate it. It would be safer, in controled areas, cleaner, healthier AND would/could raise some needed taxes for eduction, or other positive programs. it is no different then gambling or drinking or smoking. It is something you choose to do and pay for. So tax it like any other service or product.
Not to be combative or confrontational Political Disgust, because my attention span is far too limited at times to carry a conversation to the very end,(which probably nullifies my right to have an opinion) but, you do realise that you just compared a woman (yes, I know prostitutes can be men, but let’s keep it to women here since it is majority women and children who are prostituted) to a manmade commodity, --casinos, alcohol, and cigarettes.
I am well aware of the pro-prostitution stances that claim prostitution is a choice, but for many it is not.
@Kitty I fail to see the comparison to casino, alcohol and cigarettes..please enlighten me.
I have always believed that prostitution should be legal. Make it legal, tax it and regulate it. It would be safer, in controled areas, cleaner, healthier AND would/could raise some needed taxes for eduction, or other positive programs. it is no different then gambling or drinking or smoking. It is something you choose to do and pay for. So tax it like any other service or product.
Political Disgust’s argument is that prostitution is no different from gambling, drinking or smoking. However, one cannot choose to gamble, drink or smoke without the means being provided. Casinos are made by capitalists, by men predominately and so is alcohol and cigarettes. Of course one could argue that without it being regulated it will be bootlegged and thus the benefits such as the taxation that may or may not contribute to education and other "positive programs" would be lost. However, that benefit comes at the expense of other “positive programs” being ignored, like healthcare to combat a nicotine addiction and health consequences of that nicotine addition. Health care to combat the lost of one’s job, family, and income due to casinos, the same for alcohol. When it comes to “positive programs” to combat said addictions, suddenly it is all about personal responsibility. Will these prostitutes be guaranteed healthcare, both physical and mental that may result from said prostituting. Will the tax dollars cover that? Will it be a living wage? Historically, the odds are probably no. Instead it would just become legal for the people with to do what they want without experiencing the consequences of their desires while the people without suffer with the mess.
My guess is that Kitty is arguing that, by calling sex a commodity, it dehumanizes women.
Now, I think prostituion can be dehumanizing. For example, if you are forced into it. If you turn to a pimp for protection, but that pimp turns into an abuser. If you have a client who wants to abuse you.
But calling it a commodity is NOT dehumanizing. Because trading something for money (or other goods, services) is a business transaction. And it's not like prostitution is a relatively recent phenomenon. It's been called "the oldest profession" on more than one occassion.
If we want to make prostiution into something that is NOT dehumanizing, then I think we need to make it legal. The, prostitutes can form unions to create better working conditions. Prices can be regulated. Prostitutes can have benefits such as retirement and health insurance. They can get regular STD tests to catch problems early. THAT is how to improve the situation.
However, one cannot choose to gamble, drink or smoke without the means being provided.
I think that as long as people have genitalia, there are the means to use one's genitalia to make money or get food or whatever. This isn't some sort of artificial invention.
Casinos are made by capitalists, by men predominately and so is alcohol and cigarettes.
Casinos may be a relatively recent phenomenon, but gambling is not. Nor is alcohol; heck, wild animals are able to get drunk from fermented plants. I'm not sure about the history of cigarettes. But either way, these things aren't capitalist inventions in any sense of the term. Neither is prostitution, which existed long before capitalism did.
However, that benefit comes at the expense of other “positive programs” being ignored, like healthcare to combat a nicotine addiction and health consequences of that nicotine addition. Health care to combat the lost of one’s job, family, and income due to casinos, the same for alcohol.
The only way prostition can affect one's health the way nicotine can is if the prostitute is unable to afford medical care to get tested and treated for any diseases. If prostitution were regulated, prostitutes could have access to medical options that would prevent them from spreading disease. Also, people who hire prostitutes could, you know, take responsibility for their own health and use condoms. Furthermore, if someone is neglecting his/her family due to a sex addiction, that's not the prostitute's fault.
My guess is that Kitty is arguing that, by calling sex a commodity, it dehumanizes women.
Yes that’s it. It seems so inhuman and flippant to think of a woman (and again, I already acknowledged that not just women can and have been prostitutes) as a cigarette, a drink, or scratch off lottery ticket.
I cannot seem to delete this link from the first time I read it. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-423549/Littlejohn-Spare-Peoples-Prostitute-routine-.html
This man basically says that being a prostitute means risking being murdered is part of the business and we should have all just expected it, and that’s that. Reading the comments that follows his article and living my many years on earth, I just cannot imaging that attitude ever going away, whether prostitution is legalised or not.
@Kitty...here is a thought to consider, if prostitution were legalized and placed in, in-call brothels only it would reduce the amount of physical violence that prostitutes live with on a daily basis. The Johns would know just like they do in strip clubs that if they step out of line they would be dealt with immediately.
Also, people who hire prostitutes could, you know, take responsibility for their own health and use condoms. Furthermore, if someone is neglecting his/her family due to a sex addiction, that's not the prostitute's fault.
The Johns would know just like they do in strip clubs that if they step out of line they would be dealt with immediately.
Perhaps ideally. However, I am living (not physcially) with a close relative recovering from a head injury she got five years ago from a champagne bottle whacked over her head while stripping at a club. No one got to her quick enough. To add insult to injury, her worker’s comp claims are scrunitised, often denied and she is left dealing with the aftermath. So, I am very distrustful when it comes to capitalists and women depending on their benevolence.
You know, I'm not sure it's useful to refer to capitalism as a monolithic entity responsible for women's oppression. Capitalism does not have an identity; it's a political theory, not a sentient being that has the ability to act; it's neither bad nor good, but instead neutral. Individuals on the other hand can behave unethically within the capitalist system. People can act, people can be judgmental and cruel. People need to take responsibility for their actions, act ethically within the capitalist framework, make good decisions. Capitalism is an abstract concept, and people will enact it different ways. Ultimately, people are to blame, not the philosophy itself.
Also, people who hire prostitutes could, you know, take responsibility for their own health and use condoms. Furthermore, if someone is neglecting his/her family due to a sex addiction, that's not the prostitute's fault.
I don't know what happened to rest of my comment. For the above, I am not saying anything is the prositute's fault. What I want to say is, the personal responsiblity charge will be flung when the woman claims she does not have enough protection, healthcare, etc, because it will be said, it was her choice. When companies do not want to pay out, it is the fault of the consumer, not the cigarettes fault. But it will be reversed for prositutes. It will be her fault because she chose the profession (I'm saying the general sentiment towards her, not my opinion of her).
Capitalism does not have an identity; it's a political theory, not a sentient being that has the ability to act; it's neither bad nor good, but instead neutral.
It may be abstract, but it is mostly men running and benefitting from capitalism and will continue to do so.
@feministblogproject
People need to take responsibility for their actions, act ethically within the capitalist framework, make good decisions. Capitalism is an abstract concept, and people will enact it different ways.
But the very nature of capitalism forces people to resort to atrocities against other humans. The goal of capitalism is to increase profit not provide social cohesion or uplift. People are starving because we live in a capitalist system that encourages us not to think of the needs of others for the opportunity to amass commodities.
But capitalism itself isn't any more or less sexist than any other corrupt system. After all, Marxists such as Engels were known to be sexist. And others have commented on Marxist-related sexism as well.
PS - Renee, you posted comment 13 while I was writing comment 14. Had I seen that first, I would have written 14 slightly differently.
Basically, I concede that you do have a good point. However, I don't think capitalism is necessarily the most sexist of all the political ideologies. It's fair to critique it, yes. But I also don't want to discount that other philosophies have sexist tendencies as well.
For the record, I'm a capitalist, and I'm not ashamed to say so. I make a point of being ethical about it - I research companies, don't buy from Walmart or Nike or other companies with whom I disagree. I may be in a minority of other capitalists. But either way, I call myself a capitalist. And I understand why people criticize capitalism. But many other ideologies are sexist as well.
@Kitty yes when Marx wrote, he definitely did so from a patriarchal stand point however, it is important to understand that he was also a man of his times. This does not mean that theoretically womens lives would not be improved under a socialist or communist state. Remember that one of his main arguments with the dismantling of the nuclear family, which many feminists see as a primary location of womens oppression.
Communism which is the ideal state of socialism would necessarily mean that acts of economic exploitation would no longer occur, and therefore the women participating in prostitution would be doing so solely our of choice rather than need. In a capitalist economy every decision we make is based in a desire to achieve and or maintain subsistence rather than active choice..this goes for sex trade workers to he head of IBM.
Actually, I think you're directing comment 16 at me. :)
Anyway, I guess my concern is that, while there is less sexism in many countries than there was when Marx was writing (and I'm talking about countries such as the U.S., Canada, Europe, U.K., Australia because I don't know nearly enough about the rest of the world), have we reduced sexism enough that, if we tried to bring Marxism out in full force in the U.S. would it trully be gender-equal?
I don't imagine Marx set out intending to be patriarchal. But I don't imagine that whoever dreamed up the capitalist system necessarily thought "hm, this would be a great tool of oppression!" either. And I'm not confident that Marxism or Socialism would necessarily lead to a more gender-neutral society. I think it depends a lot on the people in any given system, how they choose to interpret the laws and theories and enact them.
Thanks for this post, Renee, and I agree with all your points in it.
I do want to say, I don't like that prostitution - that being the person who has sex with someone else and gets money from that someone else - is punishable in any way, including by law. But it is not my understanding that legal brothels in Nevada, for instance, are bastions of safety or freedom of any kind for the women who work there, nor is it my understanding that strip clubs are that much of a "protected space" for women either. It seems like it changes maybe the specific circumstances of some types of violence.
But I can't help but bristle at the idea of state-controlled structuring/"regulation" of prostitution. When judges and police and senators and mayors and basically the state in general is composed of people who already not only use, but abuse (insult, criminalize, pathologize, stereotype, blame for the violence others inflict on us/them) prostitutes, I could not be less eager to give those same folks a greater hand in the lives of women who are in prostitution.
Resident's have a right and a responsibility to choose the type of behavior they will tolerate in their neighborhoods.
T - Okay. As a resident of my neighborhood, I am choosing not to tolerate people being disrespectful to prostitutes.
Brilliant Renee! Just...YES!
As for legalization...well, it would make it much easier for prostitutes who get raped, beaten, robbed and infected to, oh, actually be able to do something about it legally...
"Theft of services", anyone?
I hear ya Ren but people are to busy slut shaming to give a shit about sex trade worker rights...it pisses me off to be honest. Women deserve better than this. Thanks for stopping by.
Renee, I love your blog...such amazing stuff...
and well, some of us give a shit about sex workers rights...I have to keep saying that, or I'll go drown myself in the bathtub.
I'm not so sure that "the prostitutes hurt no one" when the very first quote is saying that not only have the neighborhood's residents witnessed illegal activities, but they have actually found hypodermic needles and used condoms in their yards, yards in which I can only assume that children play in.
That isn't exactly what I would call no one being hurt, that's negatively affecting the entire neighborhood, that's negatively affecting both males and females, young and old.
As for how to fix such a problem: Well clearly there should be a place for the prostitutes and their customers to go in private, which would be much easier if prostitution were legal.
Personally, I'm all for legal prostitution. I'm not interested in buying sex at all myself, I'm not into degradation and I feel that prostituting yourself is just about the most degrading thing that a person can do.
But I do believe in individual freedom; as such, if a man or woman wanted to sell sexual services, then they should be free to do so without harassment.
"I'm not into degradation and I feel that prostituting yourself is just about the most degrading thing that a person can do."
Good thing feelings aren't universal.
Renee,
Thanks for continuing to bring the truth.
We've been having a similar thing going on here in Atlanta, and I've tried to do my part to fight it, but it becomes fucking exhausting at a point, because far to few people give a shit.
"I'm not into degradation and I feel that prostituting yourself is just about the most degrading thing that a person can do."
Good thing feelings aren't universal.
Exactly!!
T:
Resident's have a right and a responsibility to choose the type of behavior they will tolerate in their neighborhoods.
No, it's the government's responsibility to dictate what behaviors will be tolerated in neighborhoods. Residents do not have the right to arbitrarily set their own restrictions about who does and doesn't deserve to be able to walk down the streets that belong to us all.
@Charles
I'm not so sure that "the prostitutes hurt no one" when the very first quote is saying that not only have the neighborhood's residents witnessed illegal activities, but they have actually found hypodermic needles and used condoms in their yards
Right because every single prostitute is a drug addicted whore...yeah. Just because people are finding needles does not mean that they all belong to the prostitutes. Furthermore the drug problem is because the government refuses to treat instead of incarcerating people so I hardly see how the prostitutes are to to blame. It seems more to me like when people see something they don't like they are quick to blame it on vulnerable members of society.
What would be wrong with having it simply not be illegal to fuck somebody who gives you money for it?
Like the way professional bdsm is not illegal in places like NYC? Professional subs, switches, and dommes don't have to be "regulated" by the state, don't have to work at a kinky brothel in order to be "legal" or any of that.
Everybody already has to pay taxes no matter what they do, by the way, and everybody, including people in every area of the sex industry, is subject to the wrath of the IRS if they don't, no matter how they got the income.
The fact that any people in the sex industry may not report cash income is irrelevant in terms of decriminalizing prostitution. Plus, it's not an accurate assumption to say that prostitutes *don't* pay taxes, which is inherent in the statement that legalizing it would allow the government to "tax it." It's already taxable. Some people pay their taxes and some don't.
I don't want anyone who accepts money for anything sexual to be subject to criminal prosecution for it, period. I just don't like the you-must-do-it-in-a-brothel model of Nevada, at all, where women still are socially stigmatized and subject to other people's control of their bodies rather than having actual autonomy.
I think it's interesting that your post (as I read it) emphasized how the john should be made responsible for his actions, and yet it seems like most of the comments have been about the prostitute and whether or not "she" should be "allowed" to ... exist ... or keep her job.
My favorite sentence in your post is: The men are the ones wearing the condoms but the inappropriate disposal is the fault of the prostitute. That sums it up for me.
The slant of the comments seem to me to prove your point Renee. Whether it's legalizing prostitution, keeping prostitutes out of "the neighborhood", the safety of prostitutes, or capitalism as it relates to prostitution - the onus for most of these discussions has been on the prostitute, not on the john.
Until we live in a truly post-feminist, misogyny-free world, I can't honestly say that I think legalized prostitution will ever be a good idea. Now, I don't think the prostitutes/sex workers should be the ones punished -- I favor the Scandinavian model, which punishes johns but not prostitutes. (As I heard it justified on another feminist blog once, "The person with more latitude of choice bear more responsibility." I lived in Amsterdam for a year and took some classes on prostitution, and after my experience there I ceased to have such a rosy view of legalization. Is it preferable to what we have in the United States? Yes, but it still isn't a good solution.
For one thing, most of Amsterdam is a hellish place to be a woman. While I was there I was constantly catcalled (my personal least favorite was a guy who whispered in my ear "I want to swallow your pussy") I was physically assaulted by a man in broad daylight in the middle of the Waterlooplein, and my porn-loving boyfriend raped me. I had a friend whose boyfriend threw her across the room. A lot of this derives from the atmosphere that's created when women are seen as commodities -- when prostitution is legal and you live in a misogynist society, it has an enormous negative impact on women who aren't prostitutes.
But, more than my own personal experience is the fact that since women who are paid for sex are often the most vulnerable in society, legalization of prostitution tends to make the most vulnerable prostitutes even more vulnerable. For example, when Holland officially legalized prostitution in 2000 (it was tolerated but not technically legal, as marijuana still is there) it left many immigrant women out in the cold. Why? As anyone who's tried to get an H1B visa in the United States knows, you have to prove that you have some skill in your profession that nobody in the United States has, that your presence is absolutely necessary. The same is true in Holland, where women who were (sometimes) technically illegal but tolerated while working as prostitutes prior to 2000 suddenly became illegal because they had to go through all the proper channels. Today in the Netherlands, two-thirds of the women in prostitution are immigrants and one-half of them are trafficked illegal immigrants. There's a study from last year by Melissa Farley that found that in places where prostitution is legal, illegal prostitution and the number of rapes and assaults against prostitutes has increased. And, as I hope we all know, the Netherlands is a center of trafficking -- by some estimates, trafficking has actually gone up since official legalization. Allowing prostitution makes it much easier for traffickers to go undetected.
And JoanKelly, you're absolutely right about prostitution in Nevada. As one woman in a Guardian article about prostitution in Nevada says, "It's like you sign a contract to be raped." Legalization ensures absolutely nothing as long as we live in a society where women are viewed as only good for sex and not deserving of respect.
Another Guardian article that talks about the pitfalls of legalizing prostitution can be found here, if anybody is so inclined. (Can you tell I'm a total Guardian fanatic?) :P
I favor the Scandinavian model, which punishes johns but not prostitutes.
The New Zealand model would actually function better in the U.S., in my opinion.
http://www.nzpc.org.nz/page.php?page_name=Law
Post a Comment