Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: The Whore Stigma. Interesting read, but sadly, likely true.Thoughts?

  1. #1
    Born to Pleasure Women!
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    460

    The Whore Stigma. Interesting read, but sadly, likely true.Thoughts?

    Came across this in the Morning. Wonder what people think about this.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/02...cahpmg00000002

    CA OUT!
    Every woman is Crazin for the Asian Persuasion!!!
    Part time reviewer, full time reveler!
    Lover of Women, Cunning Linguist, Coitus Poster, and Master at Baiting!

  2. #2
    A great irony of c-36 is that is purported to change the structure of the industry in Canada from agencies & massage parlours to independents who do not work the streets. I realize of course that this change has not occurred, but if it does occur, it places a greater risk of identification to sex workers who may not be savvy enough to jump through the hoops that an agency does. It is almost impossible to know the real name of an agency girl. But with an independent who does her own website and uses her own cell phone and email, she has to constantly be aware to not use the cell phone and email in a transaction that will show up in an Internet search with her real name. One of my favorites in the States once told me that she had recently had an upsetting experience in which someone contacted her at her home regarding her sex work and she said she could not figure out how it had happened. I knew she was a bit of a techie and that she had done her own website. I did a Whois search on her website, and sure enough there was her registration using her real name, address, and personal cell phone. I emailed her this, and she was like "oh shit, I never thought about that."

    You really can't expect every 18-22 year old girl to think of identity protection all of the time, like a grizzled agency owner will. And you will never change the fact that the fuckers in this world who disapprove of sex work will use any information they find to be prejudiced against sex workers.

  3. #3
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    deplorable basket case
    Posts
    337
    Good one CockA, here's a few points.

    First off, the "recently published study" was done a few years ago.
    link to pdf: http://wish-vancouver.net/wp-content...ay_12_2013.pdf

    and note from page 28:
    A “sociological imagination” is required in order to extrapolate from the personal supports and challenges that participants identify with respect to movement in and out of the sex industry to larger socio-structural conditions.

    so considering this (disclaimer?) as well as the rather small sample size of the 22 people (admittedly handpicked by Bowen, page 27) you can draw your own conclusions.


    So why now? Could this have anything to do with the new Prodigal Minister? Ce qui est l'essentiel?

    Fast forward to the end of article:

    Advocates, including Ms. Bowen, are calling for the government to enshrine violence against sex workers as a hate crime, noting that occupation is not a protected category. They’re also recommending more funding for transition programs.
    “It starts with legislation, unfortunately, and the social values will shift later.”


    So that's the gist of it? Besides the "more funding" i.e., more of your money to be taken or redirected from other budgets, there is just so much wrong with that last statement, unchallenged of course by the mockingbirds. Think about it, to remove the stigma of something related to a personal choice, they want to write hate crime laws defining sex work as a special protected occupation as opposed to comprehensive decriminalization and treatment similar to any other "legit" health service? Generally speaking, free societies simply cannot legislate social values, how many more actual failures are needed for this to become understood by the so-called intelligentsia? The war on drugs or 18th Amendment in US are a few simple examples. Do people actually believe that the ignorant and sexless will suddenly welcome wanton women (and men) into their world because of a law?


    Also, note this article was also posted by the Globe & Mail and also the Star under different headlines:

    "Kayla had a new job and life — until a cop exposed her sex worker past"
    "Sex workers leaving the industry find ‘there’s no escape’ from stigma of past"


    so I suppose any stigma associated the use of the W-word itself (as opposed to "sex worker") is less important than clickbait to Huffpost? Imagine a headline "Faggot stigma - the worst barrier to coming out of the closet". No difference given the common derogatory usage of both words. You just cant make this shit up anymore.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •