Showing posts with label sex workers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sex workers. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 8, 2010

Attention Whores

The idea for this post started a couple of months ago, when Lady Gaga wore a meat dress to the VMAs and spoke out about Don't Ask Don't Tell. Many internet commenters were insistent that Lady Gaga is not committed to gay rights, and that the entire effort was just to get attention. The phrase "attention whore" came up a few times. This bothered me. Since then, I've paid more attention to the way that celebrity women are talked about online.

Some examples (trigger warning for misogyny and wishes of death):

Ke$ha
I’m tired of seeing this dirty slag… can someone please inform her that her 15 minutes of fame are up?
Snooki

Snooki–because the world needs another no-talent fame-hag. 
Please dear God just make it go away..please…..
On a gif of Snooki floating through space:
Shame we can’t make this happen in reality – fortunately for me I’m not in the US, but I’ve seen enough pictures of this … *ahem* woman(?) … to know she’s a waste of oxygen!

Tila Tequila
Bitch should be kept in a damn cage.
this whore isn't dead yet?

Lady Gaga

She is disgusting, a completely irrelevant object. How can anyone look up to this woman.
god someone please set her on fire
When will this attention whore fall of the radar?

Lady Gaga and Yoko Ono

"I've been a talentless fame whore for decades. Let me take your hand and show you the way."

Most of these comments are from that pit of slut-shaming and homophobia, ROFLrazzi. The last one is from Jezebel.

There is so much wrong with the phrase "attention whore" itself, not to mention the way it is used to reinforce the dismissive and eliminationist language aimed at women who dare to live publicly, that it's taken me this long to figure out how to approach the subject. First, I'll address why we shouldn't be using "whore" as an insult. Then, why we shouldn't be using "attention seeker" as an insult. Finally, I'll talk about the implications of the entire phrase, and the way we talk about celebrities.

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Sex Worker's Right to Safety Vindicated by Ontario Court

Well, it looks like the new law enforcement regulations that would have made it easier to target sex-workers for "keeping a common bawdy house," that I wrote about here, aren't going to be a problem in Ontario, at least. That law, along with the criminal prohibition on "communicating for the purposes of prostitution," and "living on the avails of prostitution," all of which made it difficult for sex workers to take measures to ensure their own safety, have been found by the Ontario Superior Court of Justice to violate the Charter right to security of the person.

The case does not solve the problems related to prostitution, [Alan Young, lawyer for the claimants] said.
"That's for your government to take care. Courts just clean up bad laws."
"So what's happened is that there's still going to be many people on the streets and many survival sex workers who are motivated by drugs and sometimes exploited by very bad men. That's not going to change," Young added.
"Here's what changed. Women who have the ability. the wherewithal and the resources and the good judgment to know that moving indoors will protect them now have that legal option. They do not have to weigh their safety versus compliance with the law."

CBC reports on the case.

Saturday, August 28, 2010

Sex Workers =/= Organized Crime

A den of organized crime?

Sorry for the dearth of new posts, I've been a little preoccupied. I do want to take the time to draw people's attention to this article in the Toronto Star.

The Justice Minister announced new regulations which give the government powers to wiretap, deny bail and "move in on people," as the article says, without safe-guards such as warrants. These regulations were enacted without debate in Parliament, naturally. They're targeted at fighting organized crime. But one of the crimes that they apply to is "the keeping of a common bawdy house," the definition of which is broad enough to capture individual, independent sex workers who choose to work indoors rather than on the street. Working from home, or from a condominium that you split the cost of with a couple of other sex workers, gives you a lot more control over your work and your clientèle. The fear is that these regulations will drive sex workers onto the streets.

I recommend reading the entire article. It includes commentary on the problem with how Canada deals with prostitution (prostitution is not illegal, but communicating for the purposes of prostitution, and living off the avails of prostitution are), the failure of law enforcement officials to take violence against sex workers seriously, and the Conservative government's tendency to make policy based on moral conviction rather than facts.

Contact your MP and the Minister of Justice, and let them know that you care about the safety of sex workers.