Melissa Farely

[MsAnnTeak]

Has been a leading light for radical feminists The American clinical psychologist, researcher and feminist anti-pornography and anti-prostitution activistis best known for her studies of the effects of prostitution, trafficking, and sexual violence. Much of her reasearch has been quoted on the above issues and has been highly influential in forming policies across the globe.

Recently there has been a formal complaint lodged against her and there are moves to have the APA rescind her membership.
Canadian courts have found Dr Farley to be a less than reliable witness,
finding her evidence ?to be problematic?, believing her work is
unethical, unbecoming of a psychologist, and is in breach of at least sections 5.01 and 8.10of the APA?s Code of Ethics, perhaps more.

sex-work-2010-reference-group.googlegroups.com/attach/a3b87993a830d0da/Complaint+to+APA+_Melissa+Farley.pdf?gda=11biokcAAAAASGXV9xe26yC0z09q-oJkzQiIpGuuFVKvv_B1Trw6bJCxwZJKsAB7Jsg1500Mx6obQwFxJw55cVwemAxM-EWmeV4duv6pDMGhhhZdjQlNAw&view=1&part=4&hl=en The document is 115 Pages long.

If it's upheld and her membership is rescinded will we all have to have a rethink ?

Yes I think it's just unrealistic to think that in a patriarchal society, we will unstigmatise prostitution by calling it sex work - all we do, is deny women who have no choices about doing this (ie most of them) their valid feelings about it.

We're supposed to have had the sexual revolution 40 years ago. I'm supposed to live in a society that's comfortable with the idea that women are sexual beings, that we have orgasms, that we should only have sex when we want to, that we have the right to have sex with a number of men who want to have sex with us, without assumptions being made about our moral character, our intelligence, or our pscyhological health.

And yet, the words slut, slapper, tart, nympho are probably used more often than they were before the sexual revolution. 1 in 4 of us are getting raped or sexually assaulted in our lives and there is no justice for most of those cases.

Without systematic overhaul of patriarchy, all this sexual freedom bollocks just doesn't happen - on an individual basis for some individuals (I have to say, generally speaking, feminists) yes it can happen - you can choose to live as if the sexual revolution has happened for everyone - but on a population basis, we still live in a society which is deeply fucked up about sex and still has major patriarchal attitudes to it. That won't change by calling the women who have been inveigled or coerced or trafficked into prostitution sex workers in order to benefit the tiny minority of happy hookers who haven't; without a genuine sexual revolution, which actually can't happen without a societal revolution and the demise of patriarchy, to argue for the legalisation and normalisation of prostitution, simply argues for the right of men to fuck women who don't want to fuck them and only do it for money. And that is not a progressive demand, IMO.

Yes I agree with you Uppity.

Trigger Warning - I am going to post about rape and violence experienced by an escort.

I had a bit of a look round The Honest Courtesan - the blog linked to earlier which criticises the Swedish Model. The writer describes how she has only been raped twice on the job, both times anally and both times she explains how she went into survival mode and tried to detach, relax as best she could in order to not be too badly hurt and wait until the ordeal was over. She stresses that screaming or struggling are bad ideas in this situation as they will anger the rapist and lead to more violence such as strangulation and even murder. She also describes having to wash blood away after both rapes. Both times she then went on to do another call, even though she was hurt - she describes this as 'being a professional'.

The writer also briefly describes being gang raped at gunpoint by 3 policeman before entering prostitution - she does stress however that this experience and the subsequent trauma had nothing to do with her decision to become a prostitute.

She reported none of her rapes (for reasons we can all understand about why women often do not report rape).

The writer also tells us of how she coached a girl who entered prostitution on her 18th birthday (working for the writer's agency) on how to deal with johns what are extremely unattractive to you - basically the advice was to detach and think of the money.

There is also a link at one point to another escort's blog where she describes being anally raped by a client who put a binbag over her head, beat her into concussion and made her swallow the condom he had removed.

This is the so called 'high end' of prostitution. The blog is about escort prostitution charging 300 dollars an hour. The woman in question stresses that she freely chose to move from stripping to hooking in order to earn more.

Her blog is extremely pragmatic - she describes herself as tough and very professional.

oops 'johns who'

Beachcomber what you describe in your 9:59 post(or very similar) has been experienced by many, many escorts (possibly the majority, I don't know, but I for one don't need to go to web sites to find these sorts of accounts).
But these sorts of experiences are also in large part due to the fact that it's not currently possible to practice sex work/prostitution safely.

Also, of course sex work/prostution is nothing like the sort of 'good' sex you describe, but as has been pointed out there are many women and men who are able to sell sex. And what SGB says about the sale of sex for many sex workers being parallel to certain sorts of care work is right.

It's been mentioned on this thread that we don't hear much support for legalised sex work in a safe environment from women who are actually selling sex (or 'prostituted', as you like to say, Beachcomber).
Well, no, we wouldn't, would we, since in standing up to be counted in this way, under the current law (in the UK, at least), sesx workers/'prostitutes' would necessarily be incriminating themselves.

I don't really understand your post Tchootnika.

There is nothing to suggest that prostitution is magically made less violent as a result of legal status - this is certainly not the experience of countries such as Holland, Denmark, Germany, New Zealand and Australia. People who study this phenomenon have come to the conclusion that that is because prostitution is inherently and attracts people who objectify and commodify women and their sexuality.

I disagree that SGB is right about care work being similar to prostitution - although I do think care work can be difficult in many ways.

Nurses are not penetrated by their patients and patients do not generally try to get them to swallow bodily fluids or put themselves at risk for STD or pregnancy. Patients require nursing - nobody needs to masturbate into another person.

It is currently legal to both buy and sell sexual services in the UK.

Can you give an example of a country which has a safe legal environment in which prostitution takes place that does not have any of the issues such as pimping, trafficking, child prostitution, illegal proposition, coercion, rape, links to organised crime, under-age prostitution, unwanted pregnancy, STD, over-representation of poor women, over-representation of women with social problems such as addiction, homelessness, history of abuse, abandonment etc..?

I can't.

prostitution is inherently violent

must proof read!

You cannot compare care work to prostitution. Care work may involve body fluids/violence but that's not the point of it.

There is a different power dynamic in care work too, generally it's the worker not the client that has the power - physical/emotional whatever. In prostitution it's the other way round. (Not that the first is without it's problems either, but that's a different thread)

You cannot compare sex work with any other business transaction, but people who defend the right to use porn and buy sex, constantly dredge up these absurd analogies, while also trying to discredit anyone who disagrees. Beachcomber's analysis of what happens in the sex industry, compared to other service industries, is correct. There is also no evidence at all that legalisation changes the psychological profile of the punters and their wish to defile and degrade women.

Why would it, when in fact all the evidence from sex workers themselves is that punters are becoming more violent and entitled, not less? Older sex workers link a decline in behaviour to the violent and misogynist porn that is now mainstream and readily available and younger sex workers know no different.

Prostitution needs to be seen in the context of the entire sex industry and not as a discrete activity.

My interest and study of prostitution began a few years ago once it was revealled my paternal great grandmother had become a prostitute afer her husband had been killed in war and was left with numerous children to feed on her own. By accounts she was a feisty woman, went on to become a small time money lender to the poor women who lived around her.
I view her as a victim of circumstance rather than the men she saw. Without their money my ancestors would probably died in the workhouse, or possibly of starvation and I wouldn't be here.

It may be wonderful to have an idealogy but say for instance every person stopped paying for sex, no income to any prostitute at all (take trafficked, children, sex slaves out of the equation), where will the cash come from to pay for some of the things the money goes towards ie. food, homes, schooling, better all round standard of living ?

Noticed to phrase 'priviliged few' when talking about the minority of prostitutes being mentioned. Could somebody define exactly what the term means. What determines one ?

GIP, have you worked as a prostitute ? How do you know the balance is always with the punter ? What about dominatrix who beat men up ?

As for mentioning care work and who has power, how many nurses and care assisstants are attacked by patients every year ? Figures will be online. Our local hospital now has security guards in A&E.

Windsortides, your last post speaks of evidence, is that by any coincidence evidence prosuced from the Melissa Farley school of fact ?

No.

If anyone is interested in the subject I found an interesting study

gencen.isp.msu.edu/documents/Working_Papers/WP278.pdf

The exchange of sexual activity for money is not inherently violent. Nor is penetration inherently disgusting, nor are body fluids always revolting.

I do think there is a worrying increase in the level of general unkindness in society, but it's not the porn industry, or the sex industry, that has caused this. Nor is it down to video games, horror films, or pop music.
I lay the blame mostly on the likes of Rupert Murdoch and the Daily Mail, who have been peddling a vile cocktail of sentimentality, spite and panicky tribalism to the masses for a couple of decades.

it's play acting MsAnnTeak. Obviously if the punter decided that today he wants non-dom sex, the prostitute must comply, or if she's lucky she gets to refuse. She certainly doesn't get to decide, ffs.

Your great grandmothers story is a pro welfare state argument, rather than pro prostitution one.

SGB i totally agree re the media driven unkindness, but I don't let misogynistic sex centred media off the hook. If you accept that media does influence society, (seeminly negatively, tbh) you have to accept that ALL forms do, not just the ones you personally don't like.

Who thinks that penetration is inherently disgusting, or body fluids, revolting?

So you researched your family tree, and it turned you into a slightly obsessional prostitution geek? Does anybody else think that's a bit, well, weird?

GIR, why would prostitutes have lists of dos and don'ts if they don't get any choice ?

LeBooof, why weird ? Geeked over a few things in my lifetime but none became an obsession.

'if she's lucky she gets to refuse' is what I said.

TBH i do think bodily fluids are a bit disgusting. I can get over that for people I love/like/care for. Not for just any random. that may just be me though. And quite possibly your great grandma, MsAnnTeak. Would the parish records have that information, do you think?

It seems obsessive to me linking to academic papers etc., asking for peer-reviewed "evidence" from people who disagree with you, and banging on about writers the average MNer has never heard of. So yes, it does seem weird to me. Especially as you seem content to glean your knowledge of feminism from your daughter's 'homework'

Great school for her though- I've never been lucky enough to encounter a school that asks pupils to write projects on feminism. The National Curiculuum must have got a lot more interesting these days.

I'm loving the argument that if poverty is the only other option then women should be prostituted. Presumably they could also sell their kidneys? Maybe sell their children to the nearest trafficker? Or become a hired killer, that's another option of course. I mean, heaven forbid we should scrutinise a society that allows people to be in that poverty in the first place. God no. Problem is, it does lay bare the extent of the alleged 'choice' argument doesn't it. Whoops MsAnnTeak.

I do recall on some cenus results a woman's status as prostitute put down. Not sure about the parish ones, maybe you would like to check ? You presume it was by researching my family tree I found out the family secret, not at all. A chat at a family funeral was where it first came to light.

As for gleaning my knowledge of feminism from my daughters homework, I'd been introduced to Dworkin in the 80s. DDs busy with a degree and has me looking for information on many things for her projects and coursework. Her first one was 'Does nymphomania exist ?' which brought up interesting information on the topic. How society, male and female has tried to control the sexual activity of women who were promiscious.

I agree that there are many current drivers for misogny, but to claim that the sex and porn industries have nothing to do with it is just denial.

SGB, I'm not arguing that penetrative sex disgusting or that bodily fluids are gross.

I'm arguing that undesired penetrative sex, which takes place in a societal context in which women are not equal to men, in which female sexuality is fetishized and has a market value, indeed in which women and children have a market value, is, intrinsically, violent and oppressive.

It always seems to me that arguments about a woman's right to sell sex basically come down to the notion that if the worst comes to the worst she can always survive (in the patriarchy) by letting strange men fuck her for money.

Is that it? Is that the best deal women can expect? Is that what empowerment comes down to? Getting paid to be a masturbatory receptacle?

Have we really only come that far? Don't women have the right to jobs which don't put them in danger and which don't involve rape as an accepted occupational hazard?

I agree with what Uppity said earlier - maybe one day in the future, when male supremacy is over and women are no longer oppressed, selling sex will become a neutral transaction. Until that day comes though, it is anything but.

And it is not feminists who spoil things for women who wish to earn their living this way - it is men and patriarchy.

If men didn't rape, abuse, hurt, damage, beat, pimp, coerce, threaten, murder, traffick, exploit, sell, imprison, objectify, commodify and dehumanize prostituted women, then maybe it would be in some way valid to argue the case for prostitution.

That is just so not the case currently though.

This question has been asked before in this discussion, but I would really like to know what those who make the case for prostitution think should be done to regulate it? The experiences of countries which have opened their doors to prostitution seem to suggest that massive resources are required to control the activity and stop it from turning into something hideous and inhumane. Do people really think that this is a good way to spend tax money? Wouldn't that money be better spent giving women and children different opportunities?