Interesting Interview On Tom Dunne Show [Archive]

Lucy Chambers

10-03-12, 03:33

I felt from the interview that Tom Dunne came to it with a clear belief that a very large majority of escorts in this country were in fact all trafficked. This may well be the perception of the general public also and is one which is giving the pro-criminalisation lobby their greatest weapon.Only towards the very end of the interview Eileen tried to dispute this but it was too little too late and her point I felt got lost in the overall scheme of things.

Eileen also referred to what she termed ' Elective Prostitutes ' as opposed to those who became prositutes out of sheer desperation. Again this point was made towards the latter end of the interview and she allowed Tom to brush over this point far too easily IMHO.

The main thrust of Eileen's contribution was that most women do this 'horrible work ' ( her words ) out of sheer desperation for money and that therefore it is not right for the law to cut off this money supply option for these ladies without replacing it with alternative support or funding.

I believe Eileens term of elective prostitutes was an accurate one. For many reasons. As has been said previously, I ran an escort agency for some time. All the ladies I met were "elective" hookers but they weren't all happy ones. Nor did they always meet nice people.You see, humans have flaws and we sometimes see the worst of them* while naked. You are seeing Eileens definition of her work as horrible, and applying that to now, and assuming she means all paid sex situations. My understanding is that she worked in brothels and parlours in Dublin, which back in the day were mainly agency, and had to do what she could to survive. I hate to tell you this KSteve, but that is the motivation for many people. And in the days of expensive ( like 700 punt a week ads) it was the pimps who controlled the market. Its no new thing. Independent escorts are the new thing, a bloody good thing, but we are unique in that we could only really do this now, in the age of the internet. People who think all is rosy have probably only met the odd happy indie.

In anycase, I like Eileen, she's passionate, and I respect DCG and Stella Marr. So I shall email them to ask if they will join our discussions. Action, not reaction, could be our best move. As someone said to me today, you never see the CEO of Ruhama rant. That's because she is a PR professional, paid nearly 100 euro per year. Let's hope we can be helpful to those with less altruistic agendas, even if they don't please us.

ksteve

10-03-12, 12:40

I believe Eileens term of elective prostitutes was an accurate one. For many reasons. As has been said previously, I ran an escort agency for some time. All the ladies I met were "elective" hookers but they weren't all happy ones. Nor did they always meet nice people.You see, humans have flaws and we sometimes see the worst of them* while naked. You are seeing Eileens definition of her work as horrible, and applying that to now, and assuming she means all paid sex situations. My understanding is that she worked in brothels and parlours in Dublin, which back in the day were mainly agency, and had to do what she could to survive. I hate to tell you this KSteve, but that is the motivation for many people. And in the days of expensive ( like 700 punt a week ads) it was the pimps who controlled the market. Its no new thing. Independent escorts are the new thing, a bloody good thing, but we are unique in that we could only really do this now, in the age of the internet. People who think all is rosy have probably only met the odd happy indie.

In anycase, I like Eileen, she's passionate, and I respect DCG and Stella Marr. So I shall email them to ask if they will join our discussions. Action, not reaction, could be our best move. As someone said to me today, you never see the CEO of Ruhama rant. That's because she is a PR professional, paid nearly 100 euro per year. Let's hope we can be helpful to those with less altruistic agendas, even if they don't please us.

Yes, I agree and as I posted earlier, this is the standard of PR machine which the escorting industry faces,( in addition to the existing perception of the public that most prostitutes are trafficked) and which has to be matched.

p.s. In my own view, trying to gain public support for prositutes by primarily using the arguement that desperate women , who have run out of all other options, should be allowed to choose to take the appalling step of engaging in the horrible work of selling their bodies, in order to avoid financial catastophe ( and perhaps even suicide ), is not a winning strategy.

LaBelleThatcher

10-03-12, 13:45

Seriously, I cannot get into open discussion here, because it would involve me is taking, or being presumed to have taken, a stance regarding E-I, something I am honestly not in a position to do.

But having said that, I must make some historical corrections here.

My understanding is that she worked in brothels and parlours in Dublin, which back in the day were mainly agency, and had to do what she could to survive. I hate to tell you this KSteve, but that is the motivation for many people. And in the days of expensive ( like 700 punt a week ads) it was the pimps who controlled the market.

First one being that CEO of Ruhama is, in all likelihood, paid a little more than "100 euro" per year (which, though a typo, is so close to my personal idea of what the head of any charity should be paid if they want me to believe they are working out of genuine concern for humanity and those worse off than themselves that I feel the need to mention it.). I would estimate that she is, in fact, paid in the 95k - 105k range but there is no way to be sure because it is not filed in any public accounts...and there is a little controversy brewing over the levels of CEO salaries in our wonderful charities, and the ongoing refusal to disclose them, publicly.

Now the BIG correction.

I never worked in brothels or parlours (unless you want to count 2 days "covering" in the Kasbah?)...I have a lifelong aversion to handing over the money made from selling sex to anyone and have never had anything resembling a pimp in my life.

"Back in the Day" things were different.

First off there was *NO SUCH THING* as a mobile phone...I actually leased (the purchase price was over £2000) what I believe was the very first mobile phone in the hands of a sex worker in Ireland. People asked me what it was for and I told them:
"Personal safety"
They would ask how that worked and I would reply:
"A swift tap to the head with that and my personal safety is assured :)"
http://www.techfresh.net/motorola-dynatac-8000x-worlds-first-mobile-phone/

Advertising in "In Dublin" or the (short lived) "Dublin Diary" cost £70 a week minimum (though you could get a print ad for £35), not £700 (dunno where that came from Lucy!), which was a vast sum of money in it's own right. To give you some proportion, at the same time, unemployment benefit, for a single person, was about £30 a week.

The massage parlours were brothels - there were no brothels separate to that at all - except for one escort agency run by an absolutely lovely woman who had exemplary HR skills and would be a joy to work for in any business, so I did work for her for a while.

Trying to remember prices as well as I can:

The massage parlours took £15 - £20 per client, you could easily get £100 per hour in "extras" and often more.
The agency took £30 per hour £20 per half and there was a flat fee of £150 per hour and £100 per half hour to the client.

I confess myself a little shocked at the adverse effect time, and the 1993 sexual offences act have had in terms of delinking sexual services from inflation.

We also had effective decriminalisation when some of the women from Fitzwilliam Square brought a challenge in 1983 based on the landmark 1980 King v AG ruling that determined that "previous character" (in the case of King, habitual vagrancy) was not admissible prior to conviction - ergo it was no longer possible to charge a woman with being "a common prostitute". To charge her at all you would literally have to catch her having sex *WHILE* exchanging money, I believe.

This meant that sex workers were empowered as never before (since Monto) or since. What kept the "book money" in the massage parlours so low was that, if the terms and conditions did not suit the women they could, and did, walk out and make their money as independents on the street until they were offered a better deal. They could, of course, ALSO do that at any time to make up for a bad day.

There was nothing unusual about this at all. In the Champagne Clubs in St James, London if you did not *go case* they would pay a cab to take you home...to make sure you did not bring them into disrepute by turning tricks on the way home.:o

This different, decriminalised, world meant that you literally could have no money to feed the kids for the weekend now, leave home at 6pm and be back by 11pm with groceries, with no investment or advance planning at all...and maybe, hopefully, never do it again.

For me, I always, for preference, worked the streets (Waterloo and Burlington Roads - same as the massage parlour women - one of the male parlour owners used come out to "hand pick" women, and usually would up with a middle finger, one of the madams came out at times to work) - and I wouldn't even have a flat because as long as I did not, it all stayed brisk and perfunctory, the only way *I* (<note that word, because it is really important) could handle it.

For balance, I think there were a lot of guys who could only handle it that way too...and still are. It's a more "spontaneous" market requiring no advance planning...you could "impulse buy" sex and have it over within the hour.

That offers advantages for guys too sometimes.;)

I didn't really answer the question about what I hated most yesterday because my answers to that are so complex they would have turned it into the (totally irrelevant) "Eileen Lang Show". At the time I worked I would just have raised my eyebrows and asked you "what's not to hate?". But the truth I have discovered in the meanwhile is that the things I hated were all personal to me, my values (some good, some bad, some neutral), my issues (some healthy, some not) and what I wanted and needed from life.

I know that I could not work in the terms the ladies work on E-I. I also know that I could not work on the terms the CEO of Ruhama does, albeit for somewhat different reasons, and only in one instance is that because I am a better person who places a higher value on integrity.

Anyway, we were women who, to my knowledge, without exception, hated sex work, but had no choice...and there is no doubt in my mind that we still exist.

The 1993 act forced most of us into the hands of organised crime (that was ALREADY, ruthlessly, gearing up before the act was even debated) - it is a no-brainer, that was just plain wrong.

This new, proposed legislation will just make that far worse, in a way that is so bl**dy obvious to me I cannot believe TOTRL cannot see it (I think they do see it and just do not care).

Up to this point it is all largely irrelevant to E-I - except as a curiosity...but I had to land, a bit like Dr Who, in a different time, and, unless I want to be ignorant the first thing I must do is open my (now objective and detached) mind to the changes I find in this new time.

I am not going to lie to you, I cannot understand, or relate to how an escort could enjoy not just a session (in an existentialist way - even I could do that an odd time), but a career built of sessions, but then I cannot understand or relate to a person sitting through a football match either, so maybe my capacity to relate should not be the ultimate arbiter here?

I come from (incredibly enough) 3 generations of self employed businesswomen. I have no problem relating to any woman who puts in the time, energy and effort to build up her own business in any industry - and which industry she feels is best is for her to decide, not me...end of...

I am meeting women here that I can relate to and respect who have put in the time and effort to build a business...now a loopy, fad ideology wants to shut them down...in a recession...my reaction to that is a no brainer in it's own right...even without combination with the desperation people who sell sex as a last resort...

...and hey...isn't having your business arbitrarily shut down, one of the quickest ways to get desperate in a recession? Or is that my imagination?

Anyway...I hate selling sex, I never want to have to do it again, but I really do not see how making it illegal for guys to buy sex from anyone will help or reassure me with that?

Do you?

Eileen Lang

("Thatcher" is a word specifically intended spontaneously discourage sexual arousal and avoid embarassment :) )

Morpheus

10-03-12, 14:17

Thank you Lucy and Eileen for your comments.

I am happy to sit in silence and listen to what you ecorts and ex-escorts have to say about the industry and what you feel the best way forward is for the industry (and for escorts individually).

I am humbled to hear your opinions (even if they are conflicting) as you ladies know what the real scope is. As a client, I have a one sided superficial view of the industry, and it's often blinded by my own needs/lust.

At the end of the day, your voices are the ones that should shape the criminalization of clients debate. I hope you will get your platform and be able to engage with the other interested parties.

LaBelleThatcher

10-03-12, 14:23

p.s. In my own view, trying to gain public support for prositutes by primarily using the arguement that desperate women , who have run out of all other options, should be allowed to choose to take the appalling step of engaging in the horrible work of selling their bodies, in order to avoid financial catastophe ( and perhaps even suicide ), is not a winning strategy.

But Ksteve, it is a reality (sorry, that probably isn't tactful, but truth seldom is) it is also the only aspect of sex work people (in general) are able to be sympathetic to from within their own moral and value systems.

Sexual politics is something to be argued and developed at leisure in times when there is no recession forcing people down through the cracks in the system for want of a little money that *some* of them could get, easily, by selling sex...and when sexual politics is on the agenda I will be out in my garden, not because I am "anti" anything, but because that is not important enough to *me* to get involved.

...and...see above...one of the fast tracks through the cracks *IS* having the market your business depends upon legislated away for no rational reason...

LaBelleThatcher

10-03-12, 14:26

LaBelleThatcher

10-03-12, 14:53

Lincoln

10-03-12, 15:57

PS Despite having said (I suspect) more than enough, I forgot to say why I choose the phrase "elective sex worker"...it comes from surgery...which can be life saving (essential), or just life enhancing (elective), to me it fits the sex industry perfectly...from the sex worker's perspective...writing this it suddenly occurs to me something rather similar might even be true from a client's perspective?

But that is not for me to say...

Hi Eileen, yeah it ain't a bad distinction to make as far as clients go.

I won't detract from the meaning of "essential" as far as it applies to any person contemplating sex work, but as as client yeah it has definitely been a case of essential as far as I am concerned.

Thank you for your detailed thoughts on the potential effects of new legislation.

LaBelleThatcher

10-03-12, 17:00

Hi Eileen, yeah it ain't a bad distinction to make as far as clients go.

I won't detract from the meaning of "essential" as far as it applies to any person contemplating sex work, but as as client yeah it has definitely been a case of essential as far as I am concerned.

Thank you for your detailed thoughts on the potential effects of new legislation.

Thanks Lincoln,

Also, of course I am a "civilian" these days which sets me free to empathise with you guys, and I am surprised at how much I genuinely do...

The fiendish fact of the "Swedish Model" is that it pits aspects of the sex industry against each other. I am a long term lobbyist from the perspective of the rights of disadvantaged people to use sex work as a solution to serious social problems.

I shouldn't be here on this board, not for the reasons the abolitionists would give you, but because this is an industry board as part of a marketing tool.

I was raised in a retail environment where "the customer is always right", which does not, actually mean you lie down and let the customer wipe his feet on you, it means that while you are making your living selling to your customer you have no right to do or say anything to make him feel bad about his choice of purchase, including expressing any negative feelings you have about it.

But what to do when a bunch of crazies want to shut down a whole industry on the, totally unsubstantiated grounds that the buyers are "rapists" who must be prosecuted?

There are some lies that are just too big to argue with in any normal way, if that makes any sense?

Ok, I can tick all the boxes, I hated the business, it probably did me damage, but let's keep it real...none of my clients were "rapists", nor any other kind of criminal...and to suggest that they were is completely, howling at the moon, crazy.

Don't even get me started on how I feel about the suggestion of suing my clients for damages...I hope Ruhama plan on offering me counselling on how to live with the guilt of suing a "good enough guy" for buying something I was only too glad to sell to him at the time (Or are they working on the blithe assumption that I don't care who I hurt as long as I get money, and, if so, why?).

...and behind it all these religio-feminist organisations are just trying to hurry everybody past the reality that what they are aiming to do is take away the income that over 1000 women depend on, whether from choice or desperation really isn't going to make much difference in a recession if they succeed in taking that income away...

...which, of course, they won't, all they will do is make the business far harder and more dangerous than it needs to be, as per bl**dy usual...which is a GREAT excuse for them to ask for more funding to "help" women, who, for the most part, honestly just want then to go take a running jump...

Lincoln

10-03-12, 19:15

Thanks Lincoln,

Also, of course I am a "civilian" these days which sets me free to empathise with you guys, and I am surprised at how much I genuinely do...

The fiendish fact of the "Swedish Model" is that it pits aspects of the sex industry against each other. I am a long term lobbyist from the perspective of the rights of disadvantaged people to use sex work as a solution to serious social problems.

I shouldn't be here on this board, not for the reasons the abolitionists would give you, but because this is an industry board as part of a marketing tool.

I was raised in a retail environment where "the customer is always right", which does not, actually mean you lie down and let the customer wipe his feet on you, it means that while you are making your living selling to your customer you have no right to do or say anything to make him feel bad about his choice of purchase, including expressing any negative feelings you have about it.

But what to do when a bunch of crazies want to shut down a whole industry on the, totally unsubstantiated grounds that the buyers are "rapists" who must be prosecuted?

There are some lies that are just too big to argue with in any normal way, if that makes any sense?

Ok, I can tick all the boxes, I hated the business, it probably did me damage, but let's keep it real...none of my clients were "rapists", nor any other kind of criminal...and to suggest that they were is completely, howling at the moon, crazy.

Don't even get me started on how I feel about the suggestion of suing my clients for damages...I hope Ruhama plan on offering me counselling on how to live with the guilt of suing a "good enough guy" for buying something I was only too glad to sell to him at the time (Or are they working on the blithe assumption that I don't care who I hurt as long as I get money, and, if so, why?).

...and behind it all these religio-feminist organisations are just trying to hurry everybody past the reality that what they are aiming to do is take away the income that over 1000 women depend on, whether from choice or desperation really isn't going to make much difference in a recession if they succeed in taking that income away...

...which, of course, they won't, all they will do is make the business far harder and more dangerous than it needs to be, as per bl**dy usual...which is a GREAT excuse for them to ask for more funding to "help" women, who, for the most part, honestly just want then to go take a running jump...

In terms of how Ruhama are pursuing this campaign I actually kind of respect it in-so-far as they are taking a holistic "the whole industry is poison" stance and they are not deviating form this one iota.

The main achilles heel of that position is that they are assuming that the majority opinion will be in their favour when really folks would rather hear debate and a range of opinions.

As I have said many times before: Ruhama, help those who need and seek your help, do so impartially and with compassion and for the love of jaysus quit proselytizing.

LaBelleThatcher

10-03-12, 21:59

In terms of how Ruhama are pursuing this campaign I actually kind of respect it in-so-far as they are taking a holistic "the whole industry is poison" stance and they are not deviating form this one iota.

The main achilles heel of that position is that they are assuming that the majority opinion will be in their favour when really folks would rather hear debate and a range of opinions.

As I have said many times before: Ruhama, help those who need and seek your help, do so impartially and with compassion and for the love of jaysus quit proselytizing.

With you all the way there Lincoln (though good luck with "the whole industry is poison" stance...they were trying *THAT* in Ancient Egypt and getting nowhere yet - but tomorrow is another day...) - but therein lies the rub, few, if any of the women in the sex industry want or seek help from Ruhama *EVEN* if they want and are seeking help in the more general sense.

Let me try and explain why.

Anything Ruhama has to offer is offered strictly in terms of their core ideology which, in and of itself, denies and disregards the reality and experience of the women in the sex industry....how can you possibly help anyone by doing that?

Straight away they are saying that, in order to be whole, you must first pretend to be someone else with a whole different set of experiences - in other words, *how to feck up somebody's head 101*. They have literally nothing to offer the person you really are with your real experiences and issues, they just want you as a body to be re-invented to suit their preformed agenda.

Anyway, as a result very few of the women, understandably enough, ever wanted anything to do with them. Now, in the current economic climate it does get to a point where €700k in annual funding, for an organisation who's target group has never trusted or related to them, gets impossible to justify. In essence the government is paying all that money every year for an organisation that does nothing but lobby it's own agenda - against the expressed wishes of a target user group that only feels threatened and misrepresented by them.

Add to that the fact that Ruhama is in a fringe area that a lot of people, right or wrong, do not feel should be receiving government funding at all, especially at a time when even childrens' services are being cut back.

ksteve

10-03-12, 23:34

But Ksteve, it is a reality (sorry, that probably isn't tactful, but truth seldom is) it is also the only aspect of sex work people (in general) are able to be sympathetic to from within their own moral and value systems.
Sexual politics is something to be argued and developed at leisure in times when there is no recession forcing people down through the cracks in the system for want of a little money that *some* of them could get, easily, by selling sex...and when sexual politics is on the agenda I will be out in my garden, not because I am "anti" anything, but because that is not important enough to *me* to get involved.

...and...see above...one of the fast tracks through the cracks *IS* having the market your business depends upon legislated away for no rational reason...

Hi Eileen :)-- great to see you post here and I find your own history and perspective on things worrying but really interesting.

I understand your view to be that the only reason why society would tolerate prostitution is the recognition that desperate women need to be able to take desperate measures to survive. In my view, this single arguement strategy will fail for a whole range of reasons ( which I can address at some other time in more detail).

However, you gave a personal account on the radio where you stated that you hated the idea of prostitution so much that you were willing to commit suicide in order to avoid going back into it. In a situation where society is left with the view that the selling of sex is such a vile , inhumane and degrading option , it will consider that these extremely vunerable and desperate women must be protected from themselves, as they must be no longer capable of making rational decisions.

ksteve

10-03-12, 23:40

Thank you Lucy and Eileen for your comments.

I am happy to sit in silence and listen to what you ecorts and ex-escorts have to say about the industry and what you feel the best way forward is for the industry (and for escorts individually).
I am humbled to hear your opinions (even if they are conflicting) as you ladies know what the real scope is. As a client, I have a one sided superficial view of the industry, and it's often blinded by my own needs/lust.

At the end of the day, your voices are the ones that should shape the criminalization of clients debate. I hope you will get your platform and be able to engage with the other interested parties.

Morpheus,do you think you should be criminalised for what you are engaged in now. Surely, as a top poster here, you have a view on this yourself ?

ksteve

10-03-12, 23:47

PS Despite having said (I suspect) more than enough, I forgot to say why I choose the phrase "elective sex worker"...it comes from surgery...which can be life saving (essential), or just life enhancing (elective), to me it fits the sex industry perfectly...from the sex worker's perspective...writing this it suddenly occurs to me something rather similar might even be true from a client's perspective?

But that is not for me to say...

Eileen, I really liked the term 'elective', I thought it was a stroke of genius. However, someone who is in a near suicidal state or who believes they have no options left in the world left but to sell her body into prostitution, will not be considered by society as a person capable of making an informed 'elective ' decision IMHO.

Lucy Chambers

11-03-12, 12:21

Seriously, I cannot get into open discussion here, because it would involve me is taking, or being presumed to have taken, a stance regarding E-I, something I am honestly not in a position to do.

But having said that, I must make some historical corrections here.

First one being that CEO of Ruhama is, in all likelihood, paid a little more than "100 euro" per year (which, though a typo, is so close to my personal idea of what the head of any charity should be paid if they want me to believe they are working out of genuine concern for humanity and those worse off than themselves that I feel the need to mention it.). I would estimate that she is, in fact, paid in the 95k - 105k range but there is no way to be sure because it is not filed in any public accounts...and there is a little controversy brewing over the levels of CEO salaries in our wonderful charities, and the ongoing refusal to disclose them, publicly.

Now the BIG correction.

I never worked in brothels or parlours (unless you want to count 2 days "covering" in the Kasbah?)...I have a lifelong aversion to handing over the money made from selling sex to anyone and have never had anything resembling a pimp in my life.

"Back in the Day" things were different.

First off there was *NO SUCH THING* as a mobile phone...I actually leased (the purchase price was over £2000) what I believe was the very first mobile phone in the hands of a sex worker in Ireland. People asked me what it was for and I told them:
"Personal safety"
They would ask how that worked and I would reply:
"A swift tap to the head with that and my personal safety is assured :)"
http://www.techfresh.net/motorola-dynatac-8000x-worlds-first-mobile-phone/

Advertising in "In Dublin" or the (short lived) "Dublin Diary" cost £70 a week minimum (though you could get a print ad for £35), not £700 (dunno where that came from Lucy!), which was a vast sum of money in it's own right. To give you some proportion, at the same time, unemployment benefit, for a single person, was about £30 a week.

The massage parlours were brothels - there were no brothels separate to that at all - except for one escort agency run by an absolutely lovely woman who had exemplary HR skills and would be a joy to work for in any business, so I did work for her for a while.

Trying to remember prices as well as I can:

The massage parlours took £15 - £20 per client, you could easily get £100 per hour in "extras" and often more.
The agency took £30 per hour £20 per half and there was a flat fee of £150 per hour and £100 per half hour to the client.

I confess myself a little shocked at the adverse effect time, and the 1993 sexual offences act have had in terms of delinking sexual services from inflation.

We also had effective decriminalisation when some of the women from Fitzwilliam Square brought a challenge in 1983 based on the landmark 1980 King v AG ruling that determined that "previous character" (in the case of King, habitual vagrancy) was not admissible prior to conviction - ergo it was no longer possible to charge a woman with being "a common prostitute". To charge her at all you would literally have to catch her having sex *WHILE* exchanging money, I believe.

This meant that sex workers were empowered as never before (since Monto) or since. What kept the "book money" in the massage parlours so low was that, if the terms and conditions did not suit the women they could, and did, walk out and make their money as independents on the street until they were offered a better deal. They could, of course, ALSO do that at any time to make up for a bad day.

There was nothing unusual about this at all. In the Champagne Clubs in St James, London if you did not *go case* they would pay a cab to take you home...to make sure you did not bring them into disrepute by turning tricks on the way home.:o

This different, decriminalised, world meant that you literally could have no money to feed the kids for the weekend now, leave home at 6pm and be back by 11pm with groceries, with no investment or advance planning at all...and maybe, hopefully, never do it again.

For me, I always, for preference, worked the streets (Waterloo and Burlington Roads - same as the massage parlour women - one of the male parlour owners used come out to "hand pick" women, and usually would up with a middle finger, one of the madams came out at times to work) - and I wouldn't even have a flat because as long as I did not, it all stayed brisk and perfunctory, the only way *I* (<note that word, because it is really important) could handle it.

For balance, I think there were a lot of guys who could only handle it that way too...and still are. It's a more "spontaneous" market requiring no advance planning...you could "impulse buy" sex and have it over within the hour.

That offers advantages for guys too sometimes.;)

I didn't really answer the question about what I hated most yesterday because my answers to that are so complex they would have turned it into the (totally irrelevant) "Eileen Lang Show". At the time I worked I would just have raised my eyebrows and asked you "what's not to hate?". But the truth I have discovered in the meanwhile is that the things I hated were all personal to me, my values (some good, some bad, some neutral), my issues (some healthy, some not) and what I wanted and needed from life.

I know that I could not work in the terms the ladies work on E-I. I also know that I could not work on the terms the CEO of Ruhama does, albeit for somewhat different reasons, and only in one instance is that because I am a better person who places a higher value on integrity.

Anyway, we were women who, to my knowledge, without exception, hated sex work, but had no choice...and there is no doubt in my mind that we still exist.

The 1993 act forced most of us into the hands of organised crime (that was ALREADY, ruthlessly, gearing up before the act was even debated) - it is a no-brainer, that was just plain wrong.

This new, proposed legislation will just make that far worse, in a way that is so bl**dy obvious to me I cannot believe TOTRL cannot see it (I think they do see it and just do not care).

Up to this point it is all largely irrelevant to E-I - except as a curiosity...but I had to land, a bit like Dr Who, in a different time, and, unless I want to be ignorant the first thing I must do is open my (now objective and detached) mind to the changes I find in this new time.

I am not going to lie to you, I cannot understand, or relate to how an escort could enjoy not just a session (in an existentialist way - even I could do that an odd time), but a career built of sessions, but then I cannot understand or relate to a person sitting through a football match either, so maybe my capacity to relate should not be the ultimate arbiter here?

I come from (incredibly enough) 3 generations of self employed businesswomen. I have no problem relating to any woman who puts in the time, energy and effort to build up her own business in any industry - and which industry she feels is best is for her to decide, not me...end of...

I am meeting women here that I can relate to and respect who have put in the time and effort to build a business...now a loopy, fad ideology wants to shut them down...in a recession...my reaction to that is a no brainer in it's own right...even without combination with the desperation people who sell sex as a last resort...

...and hey...isn't having your business arbitrarily shut down, one of the quickest ways to get desperate in a recession? Or is that my imagination?

Anyway...I hate selling sex, I never want to have to do it again, but I really do not see how making it illegal for guys to buy sex from anyone will help or reassure me with that?

Do you?

Eileen Lang

("Thatcher" is a word specifically intended spontaneously discourage sexual arousal and avoid embarassment :) )

Hey Eileen

Nice to see you here. I see the way to entice you here is to misquote you :) My figures would have been based on the In Dublin magazine scale of fees in the late nineties, post mobile phones but pre internet. The types of environment where the likes of Belinda Perreira would have been working, micro brothels controlled by others. In any event, I hope you decide to stay around :)

Half Man and Half Dildo

11-03-12, 12:59

ksteve

11-03-12, 13:18

Ruhama need the Irish people to view eveyone working in the sex industry as "victims". It wouldn't do their cause any good if people could see that there were many women who had chosen sex work for themselves.

Absolutely correct but I suspect that Ruhama will be more than comfortable being limited to only having to defend against the 'desperate,vunerable and optionless ' women arguement. :o IMO, they and the public need to hear more positive perspectives, like for example those set out in Kate's blog: https://www.escort-ireland.com/boards/entries/1711-Where-do-I-stand-on-being-an-Escort

LaBelleThatcher

11-03-12, 14:13

Hi Eileen :)-- great to see you post here and I find your own history and perspective on things worrying but really interesting.

I understand your view to be that the only reason why society would tolerate prostitution is the recognition that desperate women need to be able to take desperate measures to survive. In my view, this single arguement strategy will fail for a whole range of reasons ( which I can address at some other time in more detail).

Can we get on with that part Ksteve...ooooooo...say...before 2pm? :)

However, you gave a personal account on the radio where you stated that you hated the idea of prostitution so much that you were willing to commit suicide in order to avoid going back into it. In a situation where society is left with the view that the selling of sex is such a vile , inhumane and degrading option , it will consider that these extremely vunerable and desperate women must be protected from themselves, as they must be no longer capable of making rational decisions.

I do see your bias there...but it's important to get ordinary people on board with the fact that if you remove the income of essential sex workers by force you may not like the only thing they have left.

In fact...I think I probably need to start by getting *you* on board with that too? (I am assuming you are an ordinary person in your spare time?;)).

Let me go back to my surgery analogy shall I? If access to surgery is, in any way under threat, you have to first protect essential surgery...because that is where people have the most to lose, in way that may be most swiftly irrecoverable.

Same goes for sex work...

I was really skillfully redirected away from making the full point which is that the Rescue industry are consistently glossing over and refusing to raise or answer the question of what will happen to those essential sex workers. Because they will still have no viable alternative...and what do you *think* happens to people when you take away their only means of survival?

Now you are avoiding that question because you are an ordinary person and questions like that hurt to consider (as they are supposed to) but the rescue industry is avoiding that question, because they intend to wait until it is too late to change course and follow it with:
"Give us more funding and we will take care of it, and besides most of them are exaggerating and only *THINK* they are absolutely desperate, we can soon indoctrinate them to the contrary and solve all that".

Of course that is total b*llsh*t in every direction. The rescue industry has never had anything genuinely helpful to offer the majority of essential sex workers in 23 years, but not only that, even the most desperate, essential sex workers are not so far gone stupid as to trust organisations that lie to and about them and generally re-invent them in their absence.

Succeed in taking away their market and it is "game over" for many of those women, even if the end is not quick and clean...except, of course the proposed legislation will *NOT* actually take away their market at all, it will just erode any remaining power they have over their lives, place them at far greater risk, make them far more vulnerable to any and all forms of destructive exploitation...

This is the point at which my longstanding agenda usually ends, because I can prove all the above from personal experience, and I become a "civilian"...

...but, in that civilian role...HOLD ON...this is a recession...what is the biggest growth area in root causes of "situations of essential sex work" right now?

*Losing the job or business* seems a hot contender...so, where does that leave many elective sex workers if you succeed in taking away their market?

...except, of course the proposed legislation will *NOT* actually take away their market at all, it will just erode any remaining power they have over their lives, place them at far greater risk, make them far more vulnerable to any and all forms of destructive exploitation...

So I am learning this myself from a standpoint that has the very worst the rescue industry can throw at sex work covered - and I STILL cannot see one iota of sense of justification in criminalisation at all, let alone criminalising the clients EVEN from the rescue industry's point of view. I know that even their own evidence works against them unless it is selectively edited and unchallenged.

(Also as a civilian, I *do* get how hurtful my truth must be for you guys...but look at it this way...I love shoes, deep in my heart I know that a lot of the shoes I buy are made by little kids in unbearable conditions, but, I also know that, however appalling, those kids very likely would not have a way to survive at all outside those unbearable conditions...and I do not know an answer to that that does not involve breaking way to many innocent eggs to make the omelette...so I go on buying the shoes and file what I know away under "too much information".

All I would do, if I were you, is go on being as honest and decent to the escorts you employ as you can...I can promise you, whether she finds it horrible or not, the escort in question will always derive benefit from dealing with the good and respectful clients...just like anyone else...I always did anyway...)

LaBelleThatcher

11-03-12, 14:18

Eileen, I really liked the term 'elective', I thought it was a stroke of genius. However, someone who is in a near suicidal state or who believes they have no options left in the world left but to sell her body into prostitution, will not be considered by society as a person capable of making an informed 'elective ' decision IMHO.

In those circumstances that is an "essential" sex worker not an elective one, silly...

...oh, and if push comes to shove I can actually *PROVE* I had no options at all, every step of the way (yep, I even did the NGOs looking for answers - nobody had any) - life can be total sh*t like that, just be thankful it isn't for you :(

LaBelleThatcher

11-03-12, 14:23

Hey Eileen

Nice to see you here. I see the way to entice you here is to misquote you :) My figures would have been based on the In Dublin magazine scale of fees in the late nineties, post mobile phones but pre internet. The types of environment where the likes of Belinda Perreira would have been working, micro brothels controlled by others. In any event, I hope you decide to stay around :)

How can I possibly be cross with you for assuming "late 90s" :)

My figures are early 90s...and that was SOME LEAP to occur in 5 or 6 years...as I said (in 93), it was a pimps charter...can you fill me in on what changed and how in the meanwhile?

Because, of course, my number one purpose here is to get at the facts by using this really innovative research tool that seems too advanced for the NGO and both national TV stations...it is called:
"Asking people and listening to their answers"

:)

LaBelleThatcher

11-03-12, 14:56

Ruhama need the Irish people to view eveyone working in the sex industry as "victims". It wouldn't do their cause any good if people could see that there were many women who had chosen sex work for themselves.

Well you see HMHD (love that user name, may decide to apply it to entire male gender in future :)), you have that right...and what kills me is it is MY S*DDING WORK on foot of the '93 act trying to stand down the (then) image of sex workers as "saucy anti-social vermin rebelling against society for the feck of it who need teaching a lesson" (really, seriously, that was *it* then) that the rescue industry are (at least symbolically) overrunning with to make that point...

Ok...but if they do make that point...can you please tell me how you help desperate victims of society and circumstance by legislating to take away their income?

That's like ending homelessness by making it a crime to sleep on the streets - NOT.GOING.TO.WORK.

So, first let's get that bent back to my original point (circa 1993):
If a woman is driven to sell sex by absolute desperation and you haven't got a fix it is just cruel to do anything to make that even harder for her - NO BRAINER.

Then we get to a fork in their argument where on one hand they say:

*Give us unlimited funding and we will take away all their desperation*

To which my answer is:
Not until you can prove that 60% of the sex workers in Ireland are prepared, of their own free will, to deal with you at all, let alone place their lives in your hands - shall we review that situation again in 2022?

...and in the meanwhile, given that most of the sex workers in Ireland do not want anything to do with you (understandably enough considering you do not seem to recognise the as a sentient life form) and oppose every agenda you are presenting as against their best interests - exactly WHAT THE FECK are we giving you €700k a year for in an economic climate where we are even cutting back on funding to http://www.jackandjill.ie/ who offer real palliative and other options to tiny innocent little kids who are never going to even get a shot at growing up? Answers, on a postcard...

On the other hand they say:
"But you don't understand, almost all these women are abducted from their villages and trafficked here" :rolleyes:

Apart from begging the question "that being so, what HAS happened to 1000 or so native Irish Sex workers who have been fairly consistent in numbers since the 1798 uprising"...I will not be able to give you a full answer on that until I actually locate a trace of some of these "trafficked" women...it shouldn't take too long, I have loads of concerned clients, independent sex workers and even the odd agency keeping an eye open for me...at...what is it? 95%? I can't understand the delay, really...

But...APART from that...in a Irish context...effective decriminalisation in 1983 came at a time you can read about, dead handy, in "Lyn: A Prostitutes Story" when there was almost a belated "mods and rockers" style gang warfare among UK and Irish pimps and drug dealers...with the women, and their lives, caught in the middle (and the precursor of Ruhama channeling them into the laundries through the legion of mary mission). A handful of enterprising ladies (some I had the privilege to know) used the precedent established in King Vs AG in 1980 to effectively decriminalise prostitution.

By 1987 there was literally *NO* coercive pimping (you can't legislate against bad relationship choices, sadly, and they still, sometimes happened) - the women themselves, given legitimacy and full civil rights used the guards and ran the pimps themselves, and I am sure would be more than delighted (<word chosen with care) to do the same now with any trace of real trafficking..all you need to do is re-empower them...that's it, problem solved.

Because, elective or essentail, sex workers are *PEOPLE* who have some well formed negative opinions of their own about things like coercion and trafficking and hey...they have the contacts and integrity to actually *DO SOMETHING* for the real victims instead of ignoring them in favour of creating hypothetical ones to support an invalid organisational agenda.

LaBelleThatcher

11-03-12, 15:21

Absolutely correct but I suspect that Ruhama will be more than comfortable being limited to only having to defend against the 'desperate,vunerable and optionless ' women arguement. :o IMO, they and the public need to hear more positive perspectives, like for example those set out in Kate's blog: https://www.escort-ireland.com/boards/entries/1711-Where-do-I-stand-on-being-an-Escort

Not forgetting you here Ksteve because this is where I am coming in today...

Remember, I am a person in my spare time too...with a full compliment of bees in my bonnet and personal bias and prejudice...even if nothing I can think of in my whole life will ever support the criminalisation of any aspect of the sex industry, that shows, in my writing in the past...

I suppose I have a lot of ideas in common with the people who never thought of the sex industry until the rescue industry decided to rub their noses in it.

So here I am, at a fork in my life...do I jump back in and consolidate my former position - which like it or not, would work - and just keep pointing out that taking the income away from desperate women is cruel and wrong...with the unfortunate side effect of also consolidating my position as a closed minded ould wan...

...or do I open my mind and look around and see if I can persuade anybody else who isn't quite ready to resign from the "cool people" yet, to do the same? I am way outside my comfort zone and running here.

But what is really more important?

The truth? Or preformed ideas?

But the hard truth is this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/jun/10/theodora-empress-from-the-brothel
(NB the "safe houses" referred to were working houses, not rescue houses - but the coy evasion of that fact is duly noted)

The guts of 2000 years ago...most of the world never advanced that far, and any who did rolled it back...nobody ever got to push it further...and there isn't a cat's chance in hell of pushing that even a millimeter further here in time to block the legal proposals.

*I* have a hard time swallowing elective sex workers (I just do not have a choice because, sane, respect-worthy people who strike me as pretty honest are telling me that is what they are. What am I supposed to do? Tell them they are liars because Ruhama says so? Even on my worst day I am not arrogant enough to tell them they must be mistaken because *I* hated sex work!)...no way is the ordinary person in the street going to be able to swallow that....probably ever...that's life...

The most important thing is to get that destructive, damaging legislation *OFF* the table before some real people get seriously hurt by it.

ksteve

11-03-12, 20:48

Can we get on with that part Ksteve...ooooooo...say...before 2pm? :)

Ha,ha -- great.Really enjoyed that .! :D

I saw your Comments on Kate's blog and your invitation to her her to copy that post onto your site.:)

There is a very special warmth about you Eileen. You have won me over-- I am mere putty in your hands.! What, if anything , can I do to help ? :)

Curvaceous Kate

11-03-12, 20:54

Ha,ha -- great.Really enjoyed that .! :D

I saw your Comments on Kate's blog and your invitation to her her to copy that post onto your site.:)

There is a very special warmth about you Eileen. You have won me over-- I am mere putty in your hands.! What, if anything , can I do to help ? :)

I'm glad you did, as I've not been on there to see it lol. I shall go take a peek now :)

LaBelleThatcher

11-03-12, 23:02

Ha,ha -- great.Really enjoyed that .! :D

I saw your Comments on Kate's blog and your invitation to her her to copy that post onto your site.:)

There is a very special warmth about you Eileen. You have won me over-- I am mere putty in your hands.! What, if anything , can I do to help ? :)

Just keep that wonderful constructive criticism coming :) ...and make with the multiple arguments too.

Thank you so much.

doodlebug

11-03-12, 23:39

I have to say this is interesting if somewhat uncomfortable reading. Eileen, you have quite eloquently put your position, but not only that you have taken a step back and looked at the other positions too, a rare ability and one that allows you to have a reasonably balanced view on the whole industry. Many clients (I hate the word punter) love to think that the escorts they visit are doing it because, like all good businesses they have decided to turn their hobby into a profit making business, however, as you have pointed out that is rarely if ever the case. I can understand your argument that if you criminalise any aspect you are taking away the last channel of income for most sex workers, that is a very uncomfortable position to be in as a client. You see, what you are basically saying, if I can paraphrase, is that as clients we are guilty of exploitation. Despite the fact that most clients, myself included would run a mile at the thought of exploitation. If recession economics forces a woman to work in the sex industry then we as clients are exploiting that weakness.

Despite the discomfort of that position, it is our duty as clients to ensure that the avenue of earning is not closed or even made more difficult by criminalisation.

I think that the analogy with the shoes is one that I can easily understand but it does not make it any less uncomfortable. I guess looking at the same analogy my only hope is that the one dollar a month shoe factory can gain economic progress and become a 1000 dollar a month shoe factory, I suppose I am hoping for the same economic miracle for the women who find themselves selling sex for economic reasons.

Thank you Eileen for taking me, and I suspect many more, out of my comfort zone. I hope that this discourse can continue to enlighten, educate and emancipate.

LaBelleThatcher

12-03-12, 00:37

I can understand your argument that if you criminalise any aspect you are taking away the last channel of income for most sex workers, that is a very uncomfortable position to be in as a client. You see, what you are basically saying, if I can paraphrase, is that as clients we are guilty of exploitation. Despite the fact that most clients, myself included would run a mile at the thought of exploitation. If recession economics forces a woman to work in the sex industry then we as clients are exploiting that weakness.

Despite the discomfort of that position, it is our duty as clients to ensure that the avenue of earning is not closed or even made more difficult by criminalisation.

I know Doodlebug...and here you have the crux of the matter...and yet also a paradox...because if clients are guilty of exploitation then it is not exploitation in the usual sense of a free, imposition of choice to exploit at all...and besides there is always the percival factor...whereby biological imperatives lay men open to exploitation for gain by women in ways that will never be "gender equal" however many fanatical feminists are allowed to chew through the straps.

The male sex drive is more compelling and invasive than the female sex drive...that's how we preserve our species...it is also, left unsatisfied, probably a bl**dy nuisance...

If a woman wants, even needs, a sense, or illusion, of physical intimacy, chances are some male sex drive on overload will provide that at the snap of her fingers...if a man wants, or needs, the exact same it will not be so easy.

THAT is not "gender equal" is it?

...and you cannot make it gender equal, though I have noticed in amongst the other varieties of insanity being preached by extreme aspects (of the already extreme) rescue industry a tendency to try and suggest that women have the same sex drive as men and will be much more fulfilled if they leave go their inhibitions and sh*g like bunnies for free...tiny problem...women do not feel that way anywhere near as often as men (to say the least), so, even with the best will in the world, you still have this HUGE sex drive deficit going on...and unless you intend to re-engineer the male of the species (which is getting too deep into "Dr Evil" territory) there is nothing you can do to change that.

The only other approach is to supplement the available female sex drive with other available unmet needs, which can include a needs for financial security, a way to put self/kids/aged p through college, seed capitalk for a business and if that includes desperation then THANK HEAVEN there was a way to meet it with fair exchange.

When I was utterly desperate it still didn't cancel my other needs as a human being. I still needed the self respect (and security) of having something to give in return for money for one thing. I needed my autonomy, I needed my integrity intact.

If I hate sex work that is *my* problem, not yours, as long as I have no alternative...because there is nothing so special and sacred about me that you are not worthy to buy sex from me...and because it is *my* problem as long as I intend to sell sex to you I have not right to lay it on you...

Unfortunately, the massed forces of, feminism, church, ambition and pathological compulsion to control decided to lay that on you on my behalf...and if I try to take it back I lose all public sympathy and they get to persecute me again...but it gets better, because that was just a prelude to persuading society to persecute you as a rapist...(despite the fact that you are standing there in shock muttering "but what did I *do*") - unless you ignore your sex drive and abjure us for ever, because the point here is not whether you are a rapist or not, but whether a significant number of us are forced into dependence in a rescue industry we despise so that rescue industry can get increased funding and influence ...instead of watching in venal horror as the tap is firmly turned off.

Society will never be comfortable with sex work, but then society will never be comfortable with undertakers...but it managed not to persecute them because they are perceived as necessary.

Could that be made to apply here? Seriously?

You need our sex...sadly, because we are biologically different, we do not usually need your sex too, but sometimes we need your money...isn't that fair exchange that doesn't have to make anybody look, or feel, bad?

In dependent of each other, both types of need are considered socially acceptable after all...

Nicole

12-03-12, 12:51

Welcome on boards Eileen, I am actually very positive surprised. I read may of your post in different places in internet and I admire your outspoken nature.
Thank you very much for contributing to this thread, it is much appreciated.
xx
Nicole :)

carlos marvado

12-03-12, 14:18

Eileen is to be commended for taking the time and effort to share her experiences, views and concerns with us. It is rare for clients or non-escorts in general to get such a personal and unvarnished glimps behind the entire "happy hooker facade". On the one hand, the Rescue industry (Ruhama et al) portrays all sex workers as forced, coerced or having slipped into "this lifestyle as a result of an abusive/dysfunctional background or as a result of manipulation/grooming or addiction/desparation. The "Pretty Woman" scenario is at the other end of the spectrum and is probably a highly fictionalised and glamourised version of the true reality and experiences of the vast majority of sex workers.

The truth is that sex work probably encompasses a broad spectrum of methods of work and experiences ranging from complete slavery (Muslim women in the Bosnian war) and the type of underaged sex work associated with places such as Thailand to high class trophy mistresses maintained at great expense in luxury. Eileen, however seems to be addressing a middle ground, where woman choose to undertake this work, albeit without any glamourised preconceptions and high expectations of job satisfaction. I interpret her distinction between "elective" and seletive" prostitution from the prostitute's perspective, as being one where it is the last possible option to ensure financial survival/dig ones way out of debt on the one hand versus a choice after a number of less than ideal options have been analysed and prostitution seems the most financially attractive. If my interpretation is not accurate, please correct me.

I agree with Eileen that the resue industry are pushing their own agenda here, whether from a radical feminist perspective, from a moralistic/theological perspective or from a somewhat less altruistic perspective, the desire to exert influence and control over others and to gain backing/funding to allow them to continue to operate and draw good salaries. I have no objection to Ruhama or any other organisation offering help to those who need and want to avail of that help or who set out to combat enforced sexual slavery or involuntary exploitation, but it is a giant leap to move from this standpoint to tell people that "we know what is in your best interests" and "we will force the type of help on you that we decide, irrespective of whether you need it or want it".

I think this is all about making themselves relevant in society by championing a perceived just cause by portraying it as a simple two sided moral debate, and using this to extend their influence and justify increased funding. As an aside, Ruhama would not be the first "NGO", which a group of concerned professionals (usually from the social sciences/caring disciplines) set up to advance a cause/agenda and to secure state funding, so that they could essentially compete with areas of the public/civil service including the HSE etc., who are already addressing these types of service needs anyway. I have seen statistics being massaged and the range of services provided and the numbers being assisted greatly exaggerated in order to justify exchequer funding and to enhance public fundraising campaign and event. Many of these NGOs are nothing more than duplicative self-serving white elephants and the easiest way to identify them is to compare the proportion of their income that goes on salaries and on publicity/campaigning/advocacy compared to the actual services that they are intended to deliver to their target market. That is the proof of the pudding.

As many of you are no doubt aware, the two religious congregations who established Ruhama have a long history of working with those affected by prostitution; but it was not just prostitutes per say, but also women who had pregnancies out of wedlock, women who were being abused through no fault of their own, young women who were maybe just a bit too free and easy, or provided too much temptation to men, and women and children who were deemed unable to look after themselves due to poverty. For these women and children, the Good Shepherd Sisters and Our Lady of Charity Sisters (amongst others) offered help through a penitential life of prayer and obediance and hard work (mostly washing clothes). They were basically forced to live the life of nuns within an enclosed order, without having freely chosen that life style and were exploited for their labour by these good Christians. The Magdalene laundries incarcerated women and children and broke their spirits and institutionalised many of them, and those that got out where often very poorly educated and were ill equiped to make a go of life on they outside. This was allowed to happen because society at large, the state (politicians, health care system, education, legal system, gardai) and the church all colluded in hiding what did not fit our idealised view of holy Catholic Ireland from the nation........and of course, much of this edifice was state funded.

Today, neither Ruhama, nor any other organisation would get away with what was done to these people over decades in the past.........or at least one would hope they would'nt, but you do have to question people trying to force an agenda on society, offering help and solutions to people who have not been asked what type of help they really need or if they even want help, and justifying their existance as a provider of "help" to secure public funding. If Ruhama want to know what would help prostitutes, they should go and ask prostitutes, because they should know better than anyone else what they want or need.

In the meantime, it is easier to peddle questionable statistics from unrepresentative sample populations and get the public to buy into black and white soundbites i.e. prostution = trafficking and trafficking = prostitution. Of course not all trafficked people are prostitutes and not all prostitutes have been trafficked or coerced in some manner, and we already have quite strong laws against trafficking which just need to be rigerously enforced and of course policed. So instead of throwing money at Ruhama to police the bedroom antics of consenting men and woman, how about resourcing the gardai to tackle trafficking and organised and controlled prostitution instead? If Primetime could do, and if TV3 can do it tonight, and if a single guy behind a computer screen in the back of beyonds can do it for the best part of two years, then the money that goes in Ruhama, if redirected to the gardai, should well and truely be able to do it.

Ruhama are not trying to tackle human trafficking for the purposes of prostitution, rather they want to stop prostitution in all it's manifestations. To stop prostitution effectively, they need to cut off both the supply and demand side. On the demand side, Eileen covered the differences very well between the male and female libido and the fact that it is much easier for a woman to have her needs met according to her choice (the when, where and how of it). If the needs of men are greater and not so easily met (in a non-prostitution scenario), then a demand exists. An escort recently posted a thread on interesting facts that you may not have know about Ireland. It looks like it was late 90s vintage, but what was interesting in relation to this debate was the following: men going out with a girlfriend had sex on average 4 times per week, married men on average 1.5 times per week, and unattached singles on average once per six months. If we assume that the guys having sex 4 times per week are an average representative of Irish males of a legal and sexually active age and indicate how often guys would have sex or like to have sex if the opportunity presented itself, then a lot of Irish males just are'nt getting as much as they would like. Therefore we have a demand that is not being met through the normally accepted manner. The case from Limerick last November gave an insight into some of the types of men that resort to frequenting prostitutes. I would imagine that for quite a few, prostitution was the only means of experiencing physical intimacy with another human being. The sad fact of life is that there just isn't somebody for everybody in the audience. Whether a person has a disability, is not physically attractive, is getting on in years, lacks social confidence or graces or self-esteem, is socially isolated or just isn't having their needs met in the manner they would like them to be met for whatever reason; the factors which create demand are all around us. Apart from targetting clients and turning some lonely, some elderly, some disabled or some sexually unfulfilled men into criminals, having them fined, named and shamed and put on a sex offenders register, does Ruhama have any answer to dealing with these underlying factors of demand?......other than prayer and offering it up to God as some form of penance. If the clergy with their oath of celibacy can't keep their hands of women, other men (and unfortunately children in too many cases), what hope exists for us mere mortals.

carlos marvado

12-03-12, 14:19

continued/

Now to the supply side. Again Eileen has discussed her own reasons for entering prostitution. While some may have been shocked by it's lack of glamour, it does portray a path of last resort, or a least worst option which many people seem to face. So if we exclude the forced aspects of prostitution such as trafficking, coercion, violence, blackmail, and those who are conned into it by false promises or who are manipulated and groomed for it via abusive/dysfunctional life situations/experiences, we are left with those who make a consious voluntary choice through lack of other viable choices or because it might be better financially than the realistic alternatives on offer. From Eileen's perspective, if Ruhama had their way and clients were criminalised, then this means of earning an income would be taken from these people or they would end up being driven into much more clandestine and dangerous situations in trying to earn a living. Therefore while claiming to work to help people affected by prostitution, Ruhama's help is to effectively make life more dangerous for prostitutes and try to deny them a living from sex work. But other than councelling and training courses (though worthwhile and beneficial from a personal developement perspective for those in need of this) they don't provide access to any employment opportunities or to social benefits or some form of safety net, that isn't already being provided for by some state agency or other. It all sounds a bit like a faith based self-help group such as maybe AA, except it's for prostitutes. Now if I were a recovering alcoholic, I would listen and hopefully learn from the experiences of a similar other, but if I were contemplating marriage I would'nt sit down to be lectured at by a celibate Catholic priest, and if I were a prostitute I would wish to engage with others who understand prostitutes and prostitution from first hand experience. What exactely do Ruhama have to offer to the voluntary prostitute who hates the work and would love to exit prostitution above and beyond what other agencies etc can offer........employment in a reasonably well paid and rewarding job, that gives her financial security, has advancement potential, gives her the flexibility she might need (as a sole parent for example) etc.? Can Ruhama extricate him/her from the mire that cause the person to enter prostitution in the first place? If we are talking low self-esteem, dependence, coming to terms with a history of abuse, then maybe they can put something in place to help people come to terms with these issues and rescue the individual concerned and start them on a new life. But if they can't provide them with a financial safety-net that meets their needs, then why are they insisting on the one that currently exists for those that need it.

This all reminds me of a Late Late Show I saw some time back, where a female former member of the Irish Defence forces was a guest. She had written a book about her experiences of a peace keeping mission to Ethiopia or Sudan or Eritrea (that general part of the world in any event). When a new Irish battalion arrived at the base, the soldiers including this female soldier were issued with a large supply of condoms on their first day. There was very little in the locality (off the base) with the exception of bars cum brothels. Many Irish troops would socialise there for both the drink and the sex. Seeminly many of the men in the village either went elsewhere for work, or were fighting in some war/civil war or had died or been killed; in any event the place was basically just women and children surviving in abject poverty. The ex-soldier recounted that very often women would provide sexual services in exchange for food for themselves and their children; in some cases a pizza would get a peace keeper what he desired. No doubt, in many cases the soldiers gave away food to these people without any strings attached, but if they were based there for six months, away from wives/girlfriends etc. they soon found out that food or small amounts of money could get them the sort of "home comforts" that the army does not provide. I wondered why Pat Kenny at the time never asked her where the other organs of the UN or all the various NGOs were who make a big issue of helping these people or fund raise for this purpose. The food and money that the women got could very often be traded for essential medicines or other essentials also. Seems to me that Irish punters in uniform kept women and children alive when nobody else was there. Of course the program and the book caused something of an outrage, after all the Irish Army was placed under the protection of the Blessed Virgin Mary some decades ago. If I can recollect, I think the condom distribution was discontinued thereafter and the village may have been placed out of bonds........whether or not something else was put in place for those women, I don't know.

So if Ruhama was to shut down the supply of prostitution, they need to be able to do what no police force, what no goverment, what no NGO, what no supranational body or organisation, ncluding the United Nations has ever managed to do. Because trafficking and prostitution are both international issues and involve moments of people whether by force or by choice, they would need to:

* end poverty and relative or comparative poverty on a world-wide scale.
* provide full employment everywhere
* end exclusion or discrimination against women (education,social, employment) everywhere
* combat trafficking, sex-tourism ect. everywhere.
* put in place decent social provisions for everyone at risk of falling through the cracks (unemployment assistance, single parent benefits, child benefits, rent allowances, deserted wives benefits, heath care, training/education) worldwide.

Ruhama might make a small start by lobbying the government to rescind some of the welfare and allowance cutbacks and ease off on taxing the already hard pressed citizens and driving them into the black economy including possibly sex work. If they prostitute the entire nation to pay off the gambling debts of bankers and developers, do they really expect us just to lie back, shut up and smile, and take whatever is shoved at us and then to really rub the salt into the wounds, accept the likes of Ruhama taking away the livelihood of 1000+ women and criminalising tens of thousands of men. The proposed law is a lunacy on many fronts. They spend their time criminalising that which does not need to be criminalised (see blasphemy law), they won't criminalise the sort of reckless behaviour which has the country in the state it is in, and they have'nt got the resources to deal with the serious criminality that currently abounds.

They don't seem to have much of an answer to anything these days that makes sense. A legal response to prostitution will not work. The legal response to trafficking or involuntary prostitution is already there and needs to be properly resourced. The only response to voluntary prostitution that has a chance of success, is no different to what the entire country is in need of, and that's an economic one. It's the economy stupid......... and to the good people behind Ruhama I say, if prayer has worked for you for the past 2000 years, then back into your enclosed orders and the protection of high walls and continue with your excellent life of prayer..........rest assured, we won't be disturbing you with the ills of the world.

Eileen it's great to read somebody who really knows what they're writting about. I would have loved to have listened to yourself and others as articulate and with the relevant experience debating all these issues with those from the Ruhama/TOTRL side. The radio program you were on unfortunately did not have such a format.

One question I have, and you may be able to answer this. Do Ruhama et al ever actually debate with sex workers/former sex workers in public (radio/TV/meetings/conferences) or do they just try to put across their slant and agenda (with all that entails) via the media and convinse others, including the general public, without any form of engagement with those with whom they would'nt see eye to eye? I have'nt come across any debate thus far and if what the Minister for Justice is planning comes about, then it will simply be a case of interested organisations being invited to make submissions and any debate that does take place being in the Dail and Senate.

Apologies to all for the inordinate lenght of my post.......t'is the only thing about me that's long. :D

LaBelleThatcher

12-03-12, 16:13

Wow!!

Such amazing posts!

Let me just tweak this bit because a tiny misunderstanding has cropped up already (my fault) and the rest is dead on. :)

I interpret her distinction between "elective" and seletive" prostitution from the prostitute's perspective, as being one where it is the last possible option to ensure financial survival/dig ones way out of debt on the one hand versus a choice after a number of less than ideal options have been analysed and prostitution seems the most financially attractive. If my interpretation is not accurate, please correct me.

That is exactly what I mean, except you got my new fangled jargon all wrong:

Elective Sex Work = A choice after a number of less than ideal options have been analysed and prostitution seems the most financially attractive. (I chose it because "elective" is a word that means "Permitting or involving a choice" whereas "selective" is a term characterised by selection and discrimination - very odd connotations there)
Essential Sex work = The last possible option to ensure financial survival/dig ones way out of debt - which stops working when you make it "Essential Sex Worker" and is causing confusion, so let's change those terms.

Elective Sex Work = A choice after a number of less than ideal options have been analysed and prostitution seems the most financially attractive.
Survival Sex work = The last possible option to ensure financial survival/dig ones way out of debt and/or provide a sustainable income

Both of which, refer exclusively to the motivation of the sex worker, *not* how she feels about the work, much less how "the work" feels about her...now I think we need to add a third category, also referring solely to the motivation of the sex worker:

Coerced sex work = Sex work carried out under cogniscent duress, of any kind, from a third party

Suddenly it all get very simple for me. Anyone who wants to support and maximise the safety and ease with which Elective Sex Work and Survival Sex Work can exist - while respecting the needs of the wider community, which *IS* even a big part of respecting Sex Workers in giving them responsibilities as well as better rights - while coming down like the hounds of hell on all forms of Coerced Sex Work (as a the felony combination of rape and abduction it must be), is my friend...

...everybody else now has a chance to go away get their minds right...

(Arrogant much? Who me?)

LaBelleThatcher

12-03-12, 16:42

Apart from which, Carlos, I don't know what to say...except a great long line of "ditto" reaching into infinity...

I HAVE to have this post on my site...

OH PLEASE!!!! :)

LaBelleThatcher

12-03-12, 17:58

One question I have, and you may be able to answer this. Do Ruhama et al ever actually debate with sex workers/former sex workers in public (radio/TV/meetings/conferences) or do they just try to put across their slant and agenda (with all that entails) via the media and convinse others, including the general public, without any form of engagement with those with whom they would'nt see eye to eye? I have'nt come across any debate thus far and if what the Minister for Justice is planning comes about, then it will simply be a case of interested organisations being invited to make submissions and any debate that does take place being in the Dail and Senate.

Now to answer your question - and the delay is curiously relevant because I was on standby there in case Ruhama would agree to debate with me on air after tonight's documentary - but sadly, it seems, they will be too busy washing their hair after all (as you do on a monday) which, on reflection, is probably a very good thing because I honestly do not think I have the self control to be able to deal with them directly at the best of time, let alone straight after what seems set to be a travesty of a documentary (in more ways than one) that is, as usual, cold bloodedly aimed at selling out the lives of 1000 people, many of whom have families, for - well, see above...

Once upon a time they used include the same few of the women in their conferences...but the women were paid for their time and expected to speak only when spoken to. Now they have "Turn Off the Red Light" and no sense of need to include the women at all.

I have tried to plead with them privately for a little sanity and humanity of late and got nowhere, it's like trying to grip a teflon wall. They just do not seem to care, it is as if the women were pound dogs or something - not people with thoughts, experiences and opinions to contribute to their own future at all.

I cannot get comments posted on articles in the Indo...however innocuous. I have had offers from others in the NGO sector to get me airtime and media space "if you could just leave out knocking Ruhama".

As far as I can tell Ruhama have no mandate from, or consultation process with, the women at all. They have just appointed themselves to speak for and define them without reference to reality.

Alan Shatter is obviously a nicer class of person, because the Department of Justice is open to submissions on proposed changes in legislation from anyone, and, I have already checked, they know they are getting submissions from the sex worker lobby and they are happy with that. The only problem will be if they refuse to accept anonymous submissions.

LaBelleThatcher

12-03-12, 18:40

Therefore while claiming to work to help people affected by prostitution, Ruhama's help is to effectively make life more dangerous for prostitutes and try to deny them a living from sex work. But other than councelling and training courses (though worthwhile and beneficial from a personal developement perspective for those in need of this) they don't provide access to any employment opportunities or to social benefits or some form of safety net, that isn't already being provided for by some state agency or other. It all sounds a bit like a faith based self-help group such as maybe AA, except it's for prostitutes. Now if I were a recovering alcoholic, I would listen and hopefully learn from the experiences of a similar other, but if I were contemplating marriage I would'nt sit down to be lectured at by a celibate Catholic priest, and if I were a prostitute I would wish to engage with others who understand prostitutes and prostitution from first hand experience. What exactely do Ruhama have to offer to the voluntary prostitute who hates the work and would love to exit prostitution above and beyond what other agencies etc can offer........employment in a reasonably well paid and rewarding job, that gives her financial security, has advancement potential, gives her the flexibility she might need (as a sole parent for example) etc.? Can Ruhama extricate him/her from the mire that cause the person to enter prostitution in the first place? If we are talking low self-esteem, dependence, coming to terms with a history of abuse, then maybe they can put something in place to help people come to terms with these issues and rescue the individual concerned and start them on a new life. But if they can't provide them with a financial safety-net that meets their needs, then why are they insisting on the one that currently exists for those that need it.

But how can they even do that much as long as they treat us like children or dumb animals with no opinions, judgement or experiences of our own worth consideration?

Take someone with low self esteem, treat them like that and call it "help" and you will literally dismantle them beyond repair.

Even before you get into the deeply destructive "Gaslighting" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting ) effect of their ideology - anyone here...doesn't matter who...imagine receiving counselling for any normal range trauma, bereavement, relationship troubles...anything that is biased by Ruhama's ideology and distorted worldview.

I have pretty fragile self esteem (I hang onto it it balance out my arrogance, mostly to help people not strangle me really :o ) supposing, I give you my trust and, you come at me from a perspective of telling me all my clients were just the same as rapists, that they were *MY ABUSERS* - what does that do to the contents of my head? Most importantly, what does it do to the positive contents of my head?

Any respect or affirmation I received as a human being that happened to come from a client is just *CANCELLED* - just like that...and when I look at the things I need to look at in myself for my future like my aversion to sex work, you are assuring me that is a "perfectly normal" reaction to all those rapists and artificially fostering blanket denial of the real issues I have hidden under that rock that will come back to bite me for the rest of my life unless confronted.

A lot of us are survivors of one kind of abuse or another, and the first thing we have to learn to begin to heal is to develop a reflex to automatically reject people who try to impose dysfunctional control over us, or subvert our perception of ourselves and the world...particularly when they tell us they are "only doing it for our own good". We have to learn a reflex that runs from things like that being imposed upon us "for our own good"...or we will never have a life at all.

We have to learn to run from organisations like Ruhama for the sake of our mental, and emotional health.

carlos marvado

12-03-12, 19:41

Wow!!

Such amazing posts!

Let me just tweak this bit because a tiny misunderstanding has cropped up already (my fault) and the rest is dead on. :)

That is exactly what I mean, except you got my new fangled jargon all wrong:

Elective Sex Work = A choice after a number of less than ideal options have been analysed and prostitution seems the most financially attractive. (I chose it because "elective" is a word that means "Permitting or involving a choice" whereas "selective" is a term characterised by selection and discrimination - very odd connotations there)
Essential Sex work = The last possible option to ensure financial survival/dig ones way out of debt - which stops working when you make it "Essential Sex Worker" and is causing confusion, so let's change those terms.

Elective Sex Work = A choice after a number of less than ideal options have been analysed and prostitution seems the most financially attractive.
Survival Sex work = The last possible option to ensure financial survival/dig ones way out of debt and/or provide a sustainable income

Both of which, refer exclusively to the motivation of the sex worker, *not* how she feels about the work, much less how "the work" feels about her...now I think we need to add a third category, also referring solely to the motivation of the sex worker:

Coerced sex work = Sex work carried out under cogniscent duress, of any kind, from a third party

Suddenly it all get very simple for me. Anyone who wants to support and maximise the safety and ease with which Elective Sex Work and Survival Sex Work can exist - while respecting the needs of the wider community, which *IS* even a big part of respecting Sex Workers in giving them responsibilities as well as better rights - while coming down like the hounds of hell on all forms of Coerced Sex Work (as a the felony combination of rape and abduction it must be), is my friend...

...everybody else now has a chance to go away get their minds right...

(Arrogant much? Who me?)

Yes I get the impression that we're singing off the same hymn sheet here. My understanding of the escort classifications by motivation for entry into this business is the same as yours.......I just managed to mangle your category titles somewhat.

Yes, please feel free to copy and paste and add it to your blog/site if you wish. You may need to cast your eye over it as my spelling can be attrocious and I did'nt bother proof reading it.

Lucy Chambers

12-03-12, 19:55

Yes I get the impression that we're singing off the same hymn sheet here. My understanding of the escort classifications by motivation for entry into this business is the same as yours.......I just managed to mangle your category titles somewhat.

Yes, please feel free to copy and paste and add it to your blog/site if you wish. You may need to cast your eye over it as my spelling can be attrocious and I did'nt bother proof reading it.

Carlos.

Please.

Compress. It is the only way.

LaBelleThatcher

12-03-12, 20:10

Carlos.

Please.

Compress. It is the only way.

I don't think he can (besides, he makes me look so CONCISE :) )

I think, when you are out to win a debate for the sake of looking a smart alec soundbytes are great, but when you are talking about a complex agenda targeting real lives you have to cover all the bases.

Lucy Chambers

12-03-12, 20:13

I don't think he can (besides, he makes me look so CONCISE :) )

I think, when you are out to win a debate for the sake of looking a smart alec soundbytes are great, but when you are talking about a complex agenda targeting real lives you have to cover all the bases.

Maybe you are right Eileen. However, I think the goldfish rule applies here. We have three minutes to really speak. After that, its just babble.

carlos marvado

12-03-12, 20:28

But how can they even do that much as long as they treat us like children or dumb animals with no opinions, judgement or experiences of our own worth consideration?

Take someone with low self esteem, treat them like that and call it "help" and you will literally dismantle them beyond repair.

Even before you get into the deeply destructive "Gaslighting" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting ) effect of their ideology - anyone here...doesn't matter who...imagine receiving counselling for any normal range trauma, bereavement, relationship troubles...anything that is biased by Ruhama's ideology and distorted worldview.

I have pretty fragile self esteem (I hang onto it it balance out my arrogance, mostly to help people not strangle me really :o ) supposing, I give you my trust and, you come at me from a perspective of telling me all my clients were just the same as rapists, that they were *MY ABUSERS* - what does that do to the contents of my head? Most importantly, what does it do to the positive contents of my head?

Any respect or affirmation I received as a human being that happened to come from a client is just *CANCELLED* - just like that...and when I look at the things I need to look at in myself for my future like my aversion to sex work, you are assuring me that is a "perfectly normal" reaction to all those rapists and artificially fostering blanket denial of the real issues I have hidden under that rock that will come back to bite me for the rest of my life unless confronted.

A lot of us are survivors of one kind of abuse or another, and the first thing we have to learn to begin to heal is to develop a reflex to automatically reject people who try to impose dysfunctional control over us, or subvert our perception of ourselves and the world...particularly when they tell us they are "only doing it for our own good". We have to learn a reflex that runs from things like that being imposed upon us "for our own good"...or we will never have a life at all.

We have to learn to run from organisations like Ruhama for the sake of our mental, and emotional health.

Well that does seem like a very unusual form of councelling all right. My understanding of councelling/therapy was that an essential prerequisite for a good councellor was to be a good listener and not impose their own character, preconceptions and opinions etc. on the process. A councellor should be helping you to go through issues and experiences, or at most give you some guidance on ways to come to terms with the past, rather than trying to dictate an outcome which ignores the individual's needs. Seems doomed to failure to me it you don't bring the subject with you.