Being Amber Rhea

And if the last paragraph doesn’t drive home the definition of privilege, then I don’t know what will.

From Republic of T:

Add it all up, and inequality is expensive for black same-sex households. Cannick is right that there are too many Blacks living at or below the poverty line, or living just this side of it. For Black gay families, inequality adds another economic burden.

Inequality exacts a different price when a loved one dies unexpectedly.

Wesley Mercer, a gay Black man, died on September 11, 2001, while helping evacuate the World Trade Center. His partner of 26 years, Bill Randolph, also a Black gay man, struggled to get equal recognition for their relationship. Morgan Stanley, Mercer’s employer, gave him $700 to cover immediate expenses, and later a check for $10,000. Though Mercer supplied half the household income, Randolph does not receive Social Security benefits, workers’ compensation, or Mercer’s 25-year army pension. Only spouse are eligible.

Randolph has spoken up about what he faced as a gay, man losing a partner on 9/11, without the benefits and protections of marriage. I doubt he believes he or any of the Black gay couples who were plaintiffs in the state marriage lawsuits — Corey Davis & Andre LeJune (CA), Mikki Mozelle & Lisa Kebreau (MD), Alvin Williams & Nigel Simon (MD), Takia Foskey & Jo Rabb (MD), Alicia Heath-Toby & Saundra Toby-Heath (NJ) — would agree that that inequality is a “secondary issue.”

Sometimes the cost cannot be calculated in dollars and cents.

This weekend, while we were downtown, we ran into a friend of ours and his son. While the two boys played together, we chatted about the election, and he told us that he had spent election day volunteering, doing voter defense in Virginia.

We’ve known him for almost six years. We celebrated with him and his partner — a Black gay couple — when they adopted their son after several disappointments, and again when they married. Two years ago his husband — a healthy man by all appearances — collapsed at work, and was rushed to the hospital. Our friend arrived at the hospital only to be told that without proof of their relationship he could not see his husband or receive any information about his husband’s condition.

Without knowing what was wrong, or whether his husband would survive until he got back, he drove home, retrieved their legal documents, returned to the hospital and was allowed to see his husband, and had time to say goodbye. His husband died a few days later, of a brain aneurysm, without regaining consciousness.

I told that story to our white, heterosexual neighbor. She told me what happened when her husband was rushed to the hospital. She arrived at the hospital and only needed to say three words: “I’m his wife.” She got three words in response: “Right this way.”

(Via sex, art, and politics on Tumblr)

Now that it’s been a few days since the election, I want to mention a couple things that disappointed me. I didn’t want to go negative right away and kill the “OMG Obama awesome!!!!” buzz (which still lingers some for me; hell, ever since Wednesday my Tumblr has been mostly Obama pictures).

I was disappointed that California’s Prop 8 passed and San Francisco’s Prop K did not pass. Some of the news pundits were blaming black voters in California for passage of Prop 8, but I think that’s BS; my inclination is to think it has to do with low voter turnout in certain areas of the state.

One reason that amendments “defining marriage” are so disturbing to me is that you’re then using a state’s Constitution to restrict freedom of its citizens, rather than expand/protect their freedom.

Good posts about the outcome of Prop 8:

BlackGayBlogger: Finding the Words

The media would have you believe that the blame of the proposition’s passing lies squarely on the backs of Black Californians, which I find to not only be silly, but statistically impossible. I’m not sure of the exact number of Black voters who voted yes on Prop 8, but I can bet that there weren’t enough to make it a majority vote of just that ethnic group.

Sugarbutch Chronicles: post-election: on love

Despite that I do understand what people say about the threat of gay marriage, I don’t really understand. I just don’t. Why? Why why why are we so threatening? On bad days - like this one, when literally millions of people voted against my very personal right, my very personal decision to get married - my heart fills up with emotion and I feel like a little kid after another kid yells, “I HATE YOU!” My eyes well up. I didn’t do anything to you. Just - why?

As for Prop K, while I’m disappointed and frustrated that it didn’t pass, I am encouraged by the fact that it got 42% of the vote - not insignificant. But in the wake of Prop K not passing, Ren’s open letter is a must-read.

And what has your no vote done? Well, people: women, men, boys, girls, of all colors, of all sexual orientations, of all ages, cis and transgender, will still be involved in prostitution. In homes, in hotels, in cars, in massage parlors, in alleys, in clubs, everywhere. The sex trade will continue on, just as it always has. Whether there by choice, or by force, or because there are no other options, people of all kinds will still be selling sex, and people will still be buying it. You know it, and I know it. However, thanks to you, when a young woman is raped, when a young man is beaten, when any of these people get cut up, sodomized, violated, abused, mutilated, harassed, tortured or robbed, they will still have no where to go. They will still fear the law; they will still carry, along with the stigma of being a whore, the stigma of being a criminal. Their murders will still be written up with the tag NHI (No Humans Involved). You have not helped these people, why yes, real live human beings with thoughts, dreams and emotions just like you, at all. You’ve only hurt and marginalized them further.

Bound, Not Gagged also has a wealth of coverage, including this video from Margaret Prescod:

Most important take-away quote from the video, in my opinion: “Criminalization empowers pimp. I really want you to remember that.”

That’s probably all I’ll write about the election results for a while… I’ve got three other posts percolating, about 1) body image, 2) the value of blogging, and 3) pole dancing.

Yes, it’s happening way over on the Left Coast, but it’s a pretty historic thing here in the U-S-of-A and has the potential to open up the dialogue about sex workers’ rights for many people who had never thought about it or had heard only one viewpoint.

From Sienna Baskin and Melissa Ditmore at RH Reality Check: “SF’s Proposition K: Changing the Landscape for Sex Workers”:

The assumption that criminalizing prostitution reduces its prevalence, or even more absurdly, helps those engaged in the sex trade, is fundamentally flawed. Prostitution arrests help no one, especially not the people arrested. Not only is arrest itself traumatic and often violent, it drives sex workers into a broken criminal justice system and comes with a host of collateral consequences. Sex workers who have been arrested may face the loss of their mainstream jobs, adverse impacts on their immigration status, eviction from their homes, or even problems retaining custody of their children. All of these factors may force them to return to the trade, if only to be able to pay fines and legal costs, or because their criminal record precludes them from securing other employment. Most people, when asked why they engage in sex work, cite money as the reason. Criminalization and arrests do nothing to address the lack of living wage alternatives to prostitution, which should be the real goal of anyone seeking to reduce its prevalence. In fact, criminalization is expensive, both for those arrested and for the city. One thing about Proposition K is that it gets right to the heart of the matter — the pocketbook — by prohibiting use of public funds to enforce laws against prostitution, it diverts money away from criminalizing and arresting sex workers and makes it available for more effective efforts to keep everyone safe and secure. These are compelling reasons, but the most compelling reason to stop arresting sex workers is to decrease their vulnerability to violence.

From Melissa Gira: “Keeping San Francisco Safe From Prostitutes?”:

A Yes vote on Prop K will not create an “unregulated” industry where sex workers are in more danger than they already face. Remember: the only publicly-funded body regulating the sex trade right now is law enforcement. In a City where 1 in 7 sex workers say that police have forced them to have sex with them to avoid arrest, cops have as much to gain from criminalization as pimps do. Those who should take the lead in regulating the sex industry — sex workers and social service professionals — cannot when they must compete with cops. San Francisco’s Director of STD Control & Prevention supports Prop K for this reason: if cops are using condoms against sex workers as evidence of intention to commit a crime, how does that keep anyone in San Francisco safe?

A Yes vote on Prop K is a vote for human rights. For the last thirty years, regional, national, and international networks of sex workers and sex worker advocacy organizations have been fighting to protect the civil rights of sex workers. This summer, UN Secretary General Ban-Ki Moon joined sex workers in calling for the end to laws that discriminate against us by making us criminals. Prop K is just one step towards achieving that goal.

From Karly Kirchner at Change.org: “Stripping Down Proposition K - Why San Francisco Should Decriminalize Prostitution”:

Supporting Prop K does not mean that you advocate prostitution. Prop K is about supporting the rights and health of all San Francisco residents, including prostitutes. Prop K asks San Franciscans to look past their socially-conditioned attitudes about prostitution to the human lives that are impacted by prohibition.

Prop K decriminalizes the act of exchanging sex for money. Prop K does not hinder the ability of law enforcement to investigate any crime that is related to trafficking, child abuse or sexual assault.

Decriminalization does not mean that there are no regulations. For example, a carpenter is not ‘legalized’ but simply is not a criminal. There are plenty of regulations in place that protect the carpenter as a worker, the community in which the carpenter is working (such as materials, zoning, noise, etc) and a carpenter can apprentice, be trained or join a union. Under decriminalization, sex workers would have similar rights, but also have civil, labor and social guidelines to follow.

From Stacey Swimme at Bound, Not Gagged: “Opponents of Prop K Use Lies and Fear Tactics to Sway Voters”:

Prop K decriminalizes the act of exchanging sex for money between consenting adults. Any law related to sexual assault remains intact. This includes: laws that outlaw forced or coerced sex (rape/sexual assault), forced or coerced sex for money (rape, assault, sexual exploitation), laws that outlaw sex with minors (statutory rape and child sexual exploitation) and laws that outlaw moving an individual from place to place, including across national, county and state borders for the purpose of paid sex (trafficking as defined by TVPRA). Prop K DOES NOT prevent any form of investigation into the crimes mentioned above. In fact, if police were spending less time doing undercover operations to target adults engaging in prostitution privately, they could focus more of their attention on these very real crimes and other violent crimes.

From Existential Hedonist at Bound, Not Gagged: “My response to Farley on Freakonomics- Should prostitution be Decriminalized?”:

I know someone in the US who was trafficked as a runaway teen into a life of sadistic sexual slavery about 5 miles from her house. The ONE thing that kept her from going to the authorities was that she knew that prostitution was illegal, and her captor reassured her every day that if she ever dared to go to the police, she would be arrested and put in jail- which is exactly what happens in far too many cases. Prostitution WAS illegal then, and did her “criminal status” save her? How might things have been different if she knew she wouldn’t be arrested for going to the authorities?

From Rad Geek: “Ending State violence against women in prostitution in San Francisco”:

While I certainly agree that coerced sex trafficking is an evil that needs to be seriously addressed, government officials and government cops like Captain Al Pardini, who claim to be concerned about the welfare of women forced into prostitution, refuse to talk about ways to address the systemic issues that stop trafficked women from being able to come forward and speak out or seek help about what’s been done to them (like, the State’s violence against undocumented immigrants and the threat of deportation; like, the police’s refusal to take women in prostitution seriously or treat them like human beings), and instead they apparently feel perfectly comfortable insisting that their difficulties in investigating sexual slavery somehow justify laws that grant police the power to force any woman suspected of being in prostitution off the street and into police detention, under police scrutiny, to imprison her, to force her to pay punitive fines, to conduct arbitrary police raids to go on fishing expeditions for trafficked women (e.g., at “Asian massage parlors”) based on nothing other than racial profiling, and so forth, and so on, all in the name of facilitating the police’s attempts to investigate a different crime that affects some subset of the women being rousted up, shoved around, arrested, questioned, fined, imprisoned, and so on, and all in order to be able to force trafficked women into the “protection” of the criminal law, with or without their consent. This amounts to nothing more than an argument for ensuring that the State maintains and exercises plenary police state powers over all women suspected of being sex workers, for no reason other than the alleged necessity of protecting some women in the sex industry from violence, while ignoring the many crimes that women in prostitution are never able to report to the police for fear of being arrested, and while ignoring the immense violence against all women in the sex industry that is committed by cops themselves, as part and parcel of this policy of arrest and detention.

From La Libertine: “Morality and Prop K”:

The anti-Prop K argument that the ordinance will ignore abusive pimps and allow organized crime to gain a stronger hold on prostitution is absolutely ridiculous. The latter was used to try and keep the prohibition of alcohol going as well and similarly, this argument can be easily stripped. Legalizing the sale, production and consumption of alcohol didn’t put breweries, bars and saloons into the hands of the Mob; but the criminalization of alcohol most certainly did. Exactly where in the proposition does it say that offenses such as rape, kidnapping, slavery, coercion, theft, blackmail, murder or assault will be legal? Nowhere it does. In fact, because of the criminalization of prostitution, the law has implicitly made such actions legal by the simple fact that when a prostitute suffers violence the police and the courts look the other way. They do not investigate or prosecute violent offenders against prostitutes, therefore they essentially say to said offenders (and anyone thinking about it), “Oh, that’s okay. Carry on.”

Read all the posts in full and educate yourself about Prop K! And if you live in San Francisco, VOTE YES!

Update: More from Bound, Not Gagged: Wendy Vinagrette, “Decriminalization of Sex Work versus Human Trafficking”:

It is clear that the major argument against Prop K is the idea that the decriminalization of Sex Work would facilitate human trafficking. I have been in Belgrade, Serbia for the past week and a half, where I have met [and] interviewed a couple of different groups dealing with issues of human trafficking and sex work. Their experiences showed that decriminalization of sex work would potentially help minimize human trafficking.

Update #2: From Peridot Ash: “How I Will Vote on PROP K”:

Once again, the onus will be on the sex worker, but this time, rather than being blamed and shamed for our “choices,” we are being given a chance to improve the situation for ourselves as well as for less fortunate sex workers. It will be a huge responsibility to not let decriminalization result in law enforcement turning a blind eye to crimes committed against sex workers. But in the long run I think it will be worth it, so I’m going to vote YES for this, and if it passes, be ready to do my part to help other sex workers become aware of their rights.

*sigh*

I never should have gotten involved in this conversation. I mean, I do want to engage with Hugo and other commenters who can be respectful, because I think it’s an important dialogue that is well worth having. But I knew it would end up going, well, the way it’s gone. Because these conversations always do.

Once again, we are not talking about labor rights for sex workers. Once again, the “sex” aspect gets the focus while the “work” aspect is swept under the rug. Once again, sex workers’ voices are NOT centered - they are cast aside as “minority” and unimportant, if even considered at all.

I really wonder sometimes… how can ANYONE read a thread like that and NOT see why those in the sex workers’ rights movement do NOT want to engage with many anti-porn advocates? Why sex workers, regardless of how they feel about their work, don’t have the time of day for those attitudes that treat them as “other.” Or even any of us who are sexual minorities in any way (which in this case means a pretty damn broad brush).

How can anyone read a thread like that and not see THE BIG FUCKING PROBLEM??

The whole thing just makes me feel profoundly sad and… icky, for lack of a better word. My sexual proclivities put up for debate and analysis, again. My commitment to feminism questioned, again. My motives doubted, again. LIKE I HAVEN’T BEEN THERE BEFORE. Especially with the first one… you think I haven’t been getting that since day one when I first acknowledged myself as a sexual being and refused to keep quiet about it??

And I’m not a sex worker… so I can only imagine what it feels like for women who are sex workers to attempt to engage in such an environment. Double, triple, or quadruple the condescension, dismissal, sneering and disgust that I feel, I’m sure.

Look at this, from commenter Faith:

I do not necessarily believe that any woman who engages in ass to mouth is looking to self-destruct. I do seriously worry about anyone who engages in ATM.

You “worry?” Oh, fuck YOU! I don’t need your paternalism! Oh thank you for “worrying” about me, because THAT really makes me feel like you see me as an intellectual equal!

And the pièce de résistance, from commenter matey (the “you” in the comment in Ren):

I defy any woman who doesn’t have some serious self destruct issues to relish the idea of ATM. And although I have no idea of the kind of porn you produce, if it is ATM or anything else that perpetuates the idea that bullying and physical abuse is ‘fun’ (I do not count personal records of BDSM in that) I would see you as a traitor not only to womanhood, but also to humanity.

Emphasis mine.
Just… wow.

THIS is the kind of attitude that keeps sex workers (and to a lesser extent, any openly sexual woman) seen as “other,” asking for it, able to be murdered and not missed, raped but it’s not really rape it’s theft of services.

And so it keeps on going… *sigh*

December 17, 2008 is the 6th annual International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers. Not sure if we will be having an event in Atlanta again this year - but SWOP-USA has organized a national march happening in Washington, DC!

National March for Sex Workers Rights
Dec. 17, 2008, 5:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m.

Meet at Franklin Square (14st NW & Eye ST NW) near McPherson Square Station for rally and speeches.
March Gathers at noon.
March ends at The White House (1600 Pennsylvania AVE) about 3 blocks away.

Join the Sex Workers Outreach Project (SWOP-USA) as we march on Washington to demand rights for all sex workers! On Wednesday, December 17, 2008, advocates from across the nation will converge to mark the International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers. Together, we will take a stand for justice, dignity, and the freedom to do sex work safely and in dignity. We are calling for an end to the unjust laws, policing, shaming and stigma that oppress our communities and make us targets for violence. At this vibrant event, we will both honor the lives lost in 2008 and celebrate our vital movement. Some housing is available for out-of-towners - consider staying on to attend our big party that weekend. On Dec. 17th, SWOP-USA and its allies in harm reduction and social justice welcome your support as we march for sex workers rights!

Excellent round-up of sex workers’ rights orgs and what they’ve been doing, from Aspasia. And a little schoolin’.

Here’s a suggestion for you. It’s radical and subversive: LISTEN TO ALL OF THEM! The first two camps are the sex workers who do and have always comprised the sex workers’ rights movement. The group of ex-sex workers who want to abolish sex work are usually found with other abolitionists, like the Melissa Farley site she linked to in another comment with this statement, “They did some studies on prostitution. According to them, like 90% of prostitutes polled in 3 different studies by 3 different organizations said they’d like to leave the industry”. This tired statistic continues to be trotted out and anyone with half a brain cell would ask, “which prostitutes?”

Read the full post.

I’m taking a brief break from my blog hibernation (what, you hadn’t noticed?) to point out a great post by Monica at $pread Blog. She makes a very important - yet very simple - point that I think is a source of a lot of misunderstanding and frustration in discussions about sex work.

So here is another article about sex work and the economy. I hate the fact that this article exists, because I hate the fact that this bizarre cottage industry exists, this examining of sex work from the vaguely liberal viewpoint of “it’s just like any other business.” Okay, hurray for you, you don’t think sex workers are the sole agents of civil disintegration. That’s great. It’s a real pleasure to encounter an article that doesn’t make some snide remark about prostitutes being diseased and pathetic, and I mean that sincerely.

But sex work is not just like any other business. It’s not that it’s fundamentally so radically removed from other types of physical/emotional work, but it is criminalized and stigmatized, which means, no, unfortunately, it is not like being a massage therapist or a yoga instructor or an acting coach, or whatever pleasant and expendable profession to which it might be compared. “I just want to acknowledge it as regular work” is a misguided if genuine claim, and I’ve come up against it several times when dealing with journalists, and I’m getting really weary of it. This type of inquiry doesn’t allow for the reality of sex work: the arrests, the fear of being outed, the unregulated working conditions, the lack of health insurance or unemployment benefits, the extortion at the hands of club managers or pimps. We need OSHA just as much as other laborers.

I often object when anti-sex work proponents say imploringly, “The pro-porn lobby says it’s just like any other job, but it’s not!” - because this statement is so often followed by, “At other jobs, men aren’t paying for access to women’s bodies!” Which always makes me roll my eyes, take a deep breath, and try to forestall the inevitable ulcer that I will one day develop.

No, sex work is not like any other job - but that’s not because of something inherent to the work itself. Instead it’s because of the negative stereotypes that people project onto sex workers and the fact that the work is stigmatized and often criminalized. The source of the difference is external, not internal. Which is great, because external conditions can be fixed. And which is bad for abolitionists, because it means you can’t just say “it’s bad, get rid of it” and wipe your hands of the issue. It means if you treat sex workers like shit, the problem is yours.

The anti-sex work side - and, let’s be honest, most people, with the media being a cabal of top offenders - can’t get past the sex aspect of sex work, whereas the sex workers’ rights movement focuses on the work aspect. That’s why you so often hear “sex workers’ rights” hand-in-hand with “labor rights.”

I have heard the “acknowledge it as regular work” line from plenty of self-identified progressives and I always shake my head (and take another deep breath) because it’s like, hello, privilege talking! When sex workers are no longer arrested for doing their jobs or for advocating for their own rights, disbelieved because of their job when they are sexually assaulted (or the charge reduced from rape to “theft of services”), assumed to be addicted to drugs, assumed to have been sexually abused as children, expected to answer countless personal questions on demand, seen as unfit parents, fired from non-adult industry employment because of a past job in the adult industry, disallowed to speak for themselves, seen as unable to make their own decisions, excluded from discussions about policies that will directly impact their lives, equated with garbage, seen as good enough to jerk off to but not good enough to respect as a equal human beings, used as the source of cheap jokes when they are murdered, seen as easy targets by violent criminals because who cares about sex workers anyway? - then, and only then, will sex work being a job like any other job.

Short performance by Sadie Lune, explaining why sex workers’ rights are important.

Via Melissa.

Yesterday this post by Hugo Schwyzer showed up as a referrer in my StatCounter: Bridging the Porn Divide: sex, feminism, empathy, and the commitment to stop pathologizing the other side.

It’s a long post, and I suggest you read it all before reading my response to it, so you’ll be sure to have the full picture.

(I suggest you not read the comments on his post, unless you aren’t quite as harrowed by such things as I am; more than a few of them provoked this response from me.)

Anyway.
Read the full post »

Very important video made by the SWOP-Chicago crew! It covers prostitution laws and is a good primer for anyone to watch, regarding your rights if you get arrested. Check it out!