Rachel Moran at it again

[Meursault]

How can one reason with this woman, she is demented

There is no such thing as sex work, because prostitution is neither sex, nor work, it’s sexual abuse, monetised molestation" @RachelRMoran telling it like it is!!

Sounds like Marilyn French, you know, "All men are rapists and that is all they are." No point arguing with Rachel because she is just so prejudiced.

[FranknStein]

Great post!∆

[Barney Rubble]

Excellent post ISB, that sums her up in a nutshell .

[lorcan]

She doesn't hate men, she has found solace in one, she's married.

She hates clients. (And is a well known fabricator of tales)

It doesn't matter if clients go for sex alone or companionship. Irrelevant. (Though she might have had a better view of things if she herself had been more interested in/gave time to the companionship side of transactions.)


Yes I hold it against her for hating ALL clients, her clients and everyone elses, the industry and for trying to distruct it - my sympathy for her stops as soon as she tries to harm other innocents i.e. innocent clients by calling them abusers, and other escorts by calling them victims and seeking to take away their control.

Let's please not forget that whatever happened to Rachel and these women (Mia etc.), however bad or wrong it was - it was/is NOT the fault of sex, all men, all clients or the industry as a whole.


I will sympathise with her when she stops pointing the finger in the wrong direction, when she learns to blame the attacker (and an attacker can be anyone, does not need to be a client) and, most importantly - when she learns to blame a loss of control.

She could be doing a whole lot better;
*improve culture (improve respect between and for clients and escorts, reduce stigma) - lowers attacks
*improve control for escorts - lowers victims

She is doing neither of these things, she is impeding them at every turn - she is the abuser now.




.

she does hate men then, what other reason do they get married only to inflict more severe pain on us men

[inconnu]

You probably answered your second last sentence with your last.
By ignoring them, sidelining them or denying their presence-opinion.

[Meursault]

Her stance and that of Ruhama reminds me of the handmaids tale. Women cannot be promiscuous, cannot be escorts, cannot be homosexual and so on. They can only be specific roles.

It is brutal. Women should be allowed to have choice. Is that not what the whole abortion referendum is about. Sickening really and i dont even visit escorts, but i recognize that they should be allowed sell their bodies if they want.

[ladiesman217]

I've said it elsewhere, I'll say it again. Rachel Moran, Ruhama, basically anyone who has the audacity to claim that they speak for others when they are fueled by nothing more than their own bigotry and ignorance, are not feminists... they're feminazis. No room for compromise, no room for open discussion. It's their way or the highway. This or that, black and white. Ever since the day I first learned of Ruhama and began reading their drivel, I drew one simple conclusion about them. They don't give a fuck about woman's rights, they don't give a fuck about genuine victims of human trafficking. All they care about is their own self-righteous moral crusade against paid sex. Nothing more, nothing less. Anyone who refuses to acknowledge both sides of a coin is nothing short of scum. So fixated with their own archaic ideals, so distanced from reality that they wouldn't believe anyone who opposes them if they told them the sky was blue. There's a special place in hell reserved for people who refuse to acknowledge possibilities beyond their own ignorant views. There's an old saying, and by god does it suit them well. "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem". And that's them in a nutshell.