Prostitution Consultation Update

[Morpheus]

Following on from my previous post, I do think as many of us clients writing in would be helpful. Obviously not saying we are clients, and not necessarily giving our identities away. (I mentioned "creativity" in my last post regarding identity. I am going to sign mine - Bill Clinton!!! Not!)

It's a pity this section of the forum is like the graveyard slot!! Minimal traffic! I think a few posts in general chat to remind people would be good. And more importantly to raise awareness that the Swedish model isn't a done deal!! I had honestly been under the impression that it was just a matter of time until I read the consultation document which is extremely well researched and balanced.

I do hope some of the ladies get together and make a summission as part of a group/consortium.I'm quite sure you wouldn't have to divulge your names etc.. I presume you'd need a commisioner for oaths or equivalent to verify that the signatures on the submission belong to real people (similar to what activists for political prisoners do when collecting signatures). Brock or Banjaxed may be able to cast more light on this from a legal point of view.

I do think a submission from a group of escorts would carry far more weight than indivdual submissions from client posters. Afterall the whole basis of the Swedish model and the dogma of Ruhama/Immigant council - is that no woman in her right mind can work as an escort willingly!! You have to tell them otherwise. That on it's own implies that any change to the law that affects your ability to earn a living (such as criminalising your clients), is a violation of your human rights!

[LaBelleThatcher]

P.S.for those who haven't checked out the above link;


Submission deadline is Friday 11th of August 2012 at 5pm.

Needs repeating, possibly every hour on the hour...

[LaBelleThatcher]

Morpheus,

I think lots more people read than post on this forum.

1. Because it is perceived as terminally "uncool"
2. Because there is the possibility of kindergarten level harassment on other forums if they say anything people do not like.

...and the second point is not a "countersnipe" it is very, VERY important, because we have a really good chance of winning this *IF* we can all manage to remember which side we are on and row in the same direction to the best of our ability.

Talking to committee secretary today, he certainly wasn't horrified in any way by the idea of clients making submissions, it is only logical.

Not keen on that committee but they do not get to make the decisions. I suspect the very last thing they expect is for anyone from the sex industry to make submissions at all, let alone have to look them in the eye and then go back to dehumanising us and usurping our adulthood and autonomy.

Whatever else, there is no excuse for that. In the Senate they talked about us as if we were children or livestock, let them try and do that again *after* they have met some of us.

I haven't go a clue how I shall do it but I intend to make submission on the scale of an NGO...I need to do this for myself, but also because, like it or not *I AM* Irish sex worker self advocacy...and whoever rises up in the morning (and I hope to feck a few people are going to) cannot backdate that to 1993.

[LaBelleThatcher]

I do hope some of the ladies get together and make a summission as part of a group/consortium.I'm quite sure you wouldn't have to divulge your names etc.. I presume you'd need a commisioner for oaths or equivalent to verify that the signatures on the submission belong to real people (similar to what activists for political prisoners do when collecting signatures). Brock or Banjaxed may be able to cast more light on this from a legal point of view.

I think that would work...no reason whay a solicitor should not submit on behalf of and anonymous client either.

I do think a submission from a group of escorts would carry far more weight than indivdual submissions from client posters. Afterall the whole basis of the Swedish model and the dogma of Ruhama/Immigant council - is that no woman in her right mind can work as an escort willingly!! You have to tell them otherwise. That on it's own implies that any change to the law that affects your ability to earn a living (such as criminalising your clients), is a violation of your human rights!

I can't say how vitally important this is. It's not about pleasing me, or pleasing Pat, it is about your own futures, and if you do not show you care, how will anyone else?

[the traveller]

Missed all the above yesterday, thanks for all the info. Will be sending in a submission,with name and address etc. Will await any more help in framing a reply but will have it done by deadline day.
My view on any changes I would like to see, and I am open to other ideas, is similar to Morpheus.
I like things the way they are, off the streets, discrete but available in clean, comfortable conditions. The only major change would be to see two ladies work together for their safety and associated activities i.e. advertising, domestic help and the ability to rent without the fear of eviction be permitted. Maybe some form of licensing arrangement with health checks etc.
This activity will never go away and pushing everything underground will be no good for the escorts,the client or exploited or underage workers. The state has no right to be a sex control force. They may not agree with my morels but as long as what happens is between two, and I emphasis, consenting adults, is no business of the state.

[LaBelleThatcher]

Maybe I am a bit of a dissenting voice but I also want to see street zoning. It isn't right to legislate to protect one group of sex workers and leave another group hung out to dry.

Not everyone who needs to earn money from sex work is able to make the kind of investment indoor workers do...not everybody wants to. Not everybody has the temperament. Not everybody has the looks.

If you are breaking it down to the basic truth of everybody having a right to make a living by selling sex you cannot make it conditional on being able to invest in clothes, uniforms and premises, or looking like a glamour model, or being willing and mentally able to offer a long list of favourites. "Everybody" means everybody.

...and "everybody" means protecting the rights of streetworkers too.

[the traveller]

streetworkers too

What I mean by "off the street" is, ever seen the Reeperbahn or Canal street. Do you want to see Temple Bar like that? I don't but that is what full legalization taken to the limit would be like. But as I said , I'm open to all ideas.

[LaBelleThatcher]

What I mean by "off the street" is, ever seen the Reeperbahn or Canal street. Do you want to see Temple Bar like that? I don't but that is what full legalization taken to the limit would be like. But as I said , I'm open to all ideas.

I don't think that is very likely Traveller, remember, we had decriminalised streets for 10 years between 1983 and 1993 when the majority of sex workers were street workers (because there was no internet, and cards in phone boxes never seemed to take off here). And nowhere ever became like the Reeperbahn or Canal St!

The problem was that a lot of the areas were residential for very wealthy people, and that, during the recession of the early 90s, the women became too numerous and noticeable.

I don't believe in that kind of zoning. You zone areas that are (otherwise) dead at night and need additional nighttime security or traffic calming.

[Half Man and Half Dildo]

In the Senate they talked about us as if we were children or livestock, let them try and do that again *after* they have met some of us.

Not only that, but Ruhama met with the senators before the debate in a "we want you to say this, do that....." last-minute bout of lobbying. Now replace Ruhama with the bankers in the above scenario and imagine the fallout that would ensue if a debate into the financial collapse then took place, or replace bankers with gas fracking companies, etc. No matter what the issue is one-sided lobbying should not be allowed.

[the traveller]

we had decriminalised streets

Yes but not fully legal ( but I do stand to be corrected)

Repperbahn is the product of a fully legal system. But the ladies are safe, there's a police station on the corner by Burger King
and seen many of the workers talking and laughing with the police.