More thoughts…
Last night, after spending several hours watching TV (My Name Is Earl, The Office, and several Daily Shows from last week), Rusty and I got in bed and talked for a little while about Deborah Jeane Palfrey’s death, and the whole situation, and what to do when things make us lose faith in humanity. There were no answers to be found, but at least talking about it can do some personal good.
After Rusty went to sleep, I quietly cried myself to sleep.
Some of what I said last night was…
A big part of why the dominant discourse about politics in terms of party affiliations, platforms, voting patterns, and so on has always seemed so repugnant to me is that everything is cast as an “issue” to be “debated” – largely by white, straight, middle/upper class men, of course. Yesterday when I was looking for the post from two years ago announcing the official Georgia Podcast Network launch, I looked at the comments in some other posts from around the same time and visibly (if anyone had been watching, that is) recoiled, because that was when some of these “debaters” were on my blog, ugh, ew, GET IT OFF ME MAW. I guess I’d forgotten exactly what that had been like, since there’s some distance now. (Banning valeko was one of the best blogging decisions I ever made!)
These political debaters, they want to talk about, for example, abortion as an “issue.”
They used to come around my blog with that kind of shit. Another day, another screeching baby-killing feminazi post from me, and they’d come around and want to have a “balanced debate” and present the other side and why did I have to be so angry anyway, I mean all they’re doing is disagreeing with me, why do I hate free speech?
(And on and on down the rabbit hole.)
If you’re a man? Yeah, to you, abortion can be just an “issue.” You have that privilege, that luxury, to have a “reasoned debate” about this “issue.”
Do you know how that sounds to me?
This is not an “issue” to be “debated.” This is MY LIFE. And fuck you for trying to turn it into a talking point or a “wedge issue” that “divides voters.”
Rusty’s analogy was, you can have a debate over whether a single-payer healthcare system or another type of healthcare system is best. But whether people should have access to healthcare isn’t really something to be debated.
I got going down that train of thought last night because Palfrey’s untimely death is a horrible, stark example of how sex workers rights is the same way. While people are debating over whether prostitution should be decriminalized; or whether “those women” can really choose it, because they’re just so damaged, you see; or derailing conversations about harm reduction with rants about child trafficking (they might as well just march around with big posters of aborted fetuses); while all these “debates” are going on… sex workers are living their lives, and feeling the very real effects of the “policies” you want to “debate.”
Behind the policies? There are PEOPLE. And that’s the part I can never get past. I can’t dehumanize my “arguments” and talk in purely theory when it comes to stuff like this. To do so doesn’t make sense to me; in fact it feels impossible.
So forgive me if I’m thoroughly unimpressed and nonplussed with plaintive requests (always from people in a position of relative privilege, it’s like a game of Bingo, really) for “reasoned discussion” around “all sides” of “these issues.”
And here is something else I’m NOT loving. There’s a short post up at Feministe about Palfrey’s death. It’s written by a guy called Thomas. (Why are there so many guys blogging at Feministe lately? I don’t understand it, but I won’t get off on that tangent at the moment.) It is one paragraph, it links to a USA Today article – where we are warned, by a commenter, not to read the comments because they are awful – and it closes with a thoroughly patronizing line about a “culture that puts women in a position of doing sex work.”
UGH!!!
Why did Thomas not link to Bound, Not Gagged? Are sex workers not worth linking to? Why did Thomas have that unmistakable tone, yet again, of condescension and othering? Why, so far, has no one at Feministe seen fit to write anything more than basically a throwaway paragraph? (I’m holding out hope that this will change before today is over.)
Nothing but a short, few-sentences post at Feministing, either. Yet they devote paragraph after paragraph to issues that aren’t even directly feminist ones. (See Apostate for more.) Nothing on BlogHer except a few sentences in a larger post covering several AP news items.
I know it looks like I’m pointing fingers. And, in fact, I am. But I also don’t want it to seem like I’m just being accusatory out of pain in a way that absolves me of responsibility. I actually really hate it when people do that on blogs… they get pissed at every other blogger for not covering their thing, when hello, one blogger can’t write about everything, we all have our preferred areas, and accusations with no solutions don’t do much good. Like when some WOC bloggers were pointing fingers at “big feminist blogs” for not covering immigration issues… all that stuff really left a bad taste in my mouth, it felt like all complaining with no point, and immigration in and of itself is not a feminist issue anyway. That’s not what I’m trying to do here. Because, I am offering a solution: Write about it. Talk about it. Become educated about it. Talk to your friends. Break the silence.
Sex workers rights advocacy is a feminist issue. It is also a civil rights issue, and a labor rights issue. Stop pushing sex workers to the fringe of progressive-identified movements, like they are in basically every other area of society.
…I have to stop now. My thoughts are too jumbled. Later I’ll probably either amend this post, or just start a new one. There was more we talked about last night, but I need to try to figure out how best to write about it.
[My apologies for the excessive use of quotation marks herein. They were necessary, though.]
ETA: And one other thing… if I see/hear one more person write/say, “Prostitution, drugs and gambling should all be legalized, taxed and regulated” – always in that very-pleased-with-themselves, “look aren’t I so smart and progressive” way – I am going to shit a brick. NO, just NO. Drugs are NOT comparable to sex work, and regulation is NOT a good idea, and how about pulling your head out of your ass for half a minute to consider WHY that might be.
ETA, pt. 2: Also, stop with the “I agree her death was tragic, BUT…” -No. There is no “but.” Shut the fuck up. You’re being an asshole.
ETA, pt. 3: Molly Crabapple says:
http://wonkette.com/386215/dc-madam-found-dead
I read her extraordinarily smart and brave interview with $pread some months ago, and learned that she was facing a huge jail sentence. It’s obvious she was railroaded into committing suicide.
Meanwhile, swine like Vitter, who used her agencies services while causing misery to sex workers around the world, get off scott free.
Horrifying.
Nearly as horrifying is reading the comments. It makes it clear that, if you work in the sex industry, it doesn’t matter if you die to most people- even supposedly educated, liberal ones.
This punched me in the gut.
And this is why I go through periods of feeling like I’ve lost all faith in humanity. I truly cannot conceive of the heartlessness some people display so prominently.
Jen,
Start here:
http://www.freedomusa.org/coyotela/decrim.html
http://www.bayswan.org/defining.html
http://www.sexwork.com/coalition/derimvslegal.html
There is also a good discussion in this video (which was shown at the Dec. 17th program at Charis) about why regulation is a bad idea.
I wasn’t really referring to regulation, since I believe both prostitution and marijuana should be relatively regulation free. It’s sex. It’s a plant. It’s not rocket science. I just meant that the premise behind legalizing both is the same, to me anyway.
But now that I’m thinking about it, wouldn’t prostitutes be required to get a business license? My friend B. had to get an independent contractor license of some sort when she was dancing.
I think maybe you’re not seeing the difference in the words. Sex workers rights activists advocate for decriminalization not legalization. It’s a common mistake and part of why sites such as Sex Work 101 were created.
The licensing for dancers is a huge problem and an example of what’s wrong with regulation. That was another issue addressed at the Dec. 17th program, and one I would like to do more local organizing around (except somebody else needs to take the reins, because I’m worn out). There are SO many things wrong with that licensing, and I don’t have time to type them all out now.
Why not? It always boils to this basic premise, “Whose business is it what I do with my body? Whether it’s smoking a joint or having sex for money?”
Yes, I know the difference between decriminalization and legalization. I was asking whether prostitutes would be required to get business licenses under the current scheme of things, not advocating that position.
Under the current scheme of things? No, because it’s illegal. I guess I’m confused about what you are asking? :o
Great post. That was absolutely eloquent.
You know, it really irks me when some “feminists” go on about how terrible sex workers are and how much they don’t like them. And really, there are a lot that do. There’s a point where it goes beyond personal opposition to sex work (which I think is wrong, but I can kind of respect), and ends up being just full-out hate of sex workers. It’s really depressing, especially after this happens.
Oops! I meant I think most opposition to sex work doesn’t make much sense, not that I think sex work is morally wrong.
[...] Amber Rhea: RIP, Deborah Jeane Palfrey; More Thoughts [...]
You only mentioned it tangentially but YES! WTF is up with men on feminist blogs? Especially as Thomas is downright creepy.
[...] I think Amber Rhea said it better than I ever could. [...]
Nice work.
“Behind the policies? There are PEOPLE. And that’s the part that I can never get past. I can’t dehumanize my “arguments” and talk in purely theory when it comes to stuff like this.”
The effect on people doing the work IRL is often lost in the investigation of which theory will better someone’s political cred.
I’m here looking for allies. And to listen. And to find out why WP’s Flash image uploader died (and then got better on Opera) And to lend a hand if I can and somebody aks.
I’ll go away if you want.
Bob,
We’re referring to men being central, prolific, front-page bloggers on major feminist blogs, not to men commenting, discussing, or being occasional guest bloggers (all of which are GOOD things).
I have a longer blog post on this topic in the works… it’s been perpetually in draft mode for 2 days due to lack of time. But hopefully I’ll actually finish it soon.
[...] mentioned before how I was thoroughly unpleased with his throwaway paragraph, peppered heavily with paternalism, [...]
[...] death of Deborah Jeane Palfrey. In my second post on the topic, written on Friday, I lamented the lack of coverage of this tragedy on big feminist blogs. Being an eternal optimist (often to a fault, I know), I gave Feministe and [...]
[...] http://www.freedomusa.org/coyotela/decrim.html http://www.bayswan.org/defining.html http://www.sexwork.com/coalition/derimvslegal.html …and I also touched on it briefly here: http://www.beingamberrhea.com/2008/05/02/more-thoughts/ [...]
[...] was so, so, so glad to hear that sentiment expressed in the movie. it’s something I’ve written about before; but I really don’t think it can be stressed too much, and I also think it’s something [...]