Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

The invisible men project

999 replies

ArmyOfPenguins · 06/05/2013 22:45

I think it's important that the buyers' choices in prostitution are highlighted and shared. This project was linked to on FB. Thoughts? I think it's a great idea.

the-invisible-men.tumblr.com/

OP posts:
WhentheRed · 22/08/2013 19:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

WhentheRed · 22/08/2013 19:53

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

inwinoweritas · 22/08/2013 19:59

When the red
Oh-back to your usual tone-glad you got the argument

  1. I have in a number of replies dealt with the OP-the thread introduced McKinnon on whether prostitutes could exert true agency or choice-I provided a reference to another article on the same issue-Flora jumped in with demands for evidence-but any evidence she refuses to read

  2. I agree rape is abhorrent-and as I have said-but you refuse to understand I am not dismissing their experience-what I am saying as that many prostitutes do not experience rape-especially those working indoors

  3. I agree it is repugnant

FloraFox · 22/08/2013 20:02

Here we have inwino, a man who seems to spend a seemingly inordinate amount of time on this issue. He has "examined a ton of PhD theses authored many academic papers and reviewed thousands more" but yet he can't seem to get the mummies to see the light. He's talking to mummies so it can't be because he's not actually that smart and can't actually synthesise the research and put his point across concisely and compellingly. No way. It must be them. The mummies must have closed minds. That's it. Just like some other random group that have nothing to do with this but will be usefully insulting to use as a comparison.

I have never claimed to have any knowledge of the New Zealand parliamentary process. In fact, I asked you throughout to explain why this report is credible or reliable. You still haven't done that - the deep involvement of a pro-prostitution advocacy group in the report raises issues of fundamental bias. (Full disclosure: I am also breathtakingly ignorant of the parliamentary processes of every government in the world minus five.)

If you say that no level of rape is acceptable, what is the actual point of the statistics you are putting forward? What are you trying to prove by using these reports? What is your thesis statement in all this?

ps don't forget my question about structure.

BitBewildered · 22/08/2013 20:02

wino your posts sound increasingly agitated. However, your formatting is slightly better which is nice.

WhentheRed · 22/08/2013 20:36

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

inwinoweritas · 22/08/2013 23:09

It's not the mummies flora-its you that has a closed mind-you started off this "derailment" by asking for evidence-I provided sources of that evidence-you refuse to read it, and then try ad hominem methods of rejecting it-failing that you try and say-without looking at it that its not representative-so you don't look at it. You then betray your ignorance by labelling it "pimp-punter propaganda" again without looking at it.

What's it like to live with such a closed mind that wont even read evidence-then you might has a more considered reason for rejecting it?

FloraFox · 22/08/2013 23:39

inwino by your own posts, it seems like the evidence you think is so important demonstrates that there is an unacceptable level of rape occurring in New Zealand despite prostituion being legalised. Is that the point you are making? I agree with you. Legalisation of prostituion does not protect women in prostituion from the largest source of danger - pimps and prostitutes. So why are you advocating legalisation?

Ps don't forget my question about structure.

inwinoweritas · 23/08/2013 00:03

Could you clarify what you mean by your PS?

and legalization does protect those who are working in prostitution-if they are (for instance by a brothel owner) asked to do something with which they disagree they have legal protection. They can also complain to the police if for instance they are robbed without fear that they will be arrested for prostitution. If you would only read the review of the operation of the 2003 act in NZ you will see a whole lot of qualitative and quantitative data which shows the benefits of legalization. But I know you wont as your mind is made up that it is pimp-punter propaganda

FloraFox · 23/08/2013 00:23

You said your view is based on agency and harm reduction. I asked for your view on structure.

By your admission your survey has failed to reduce rape to an acceptable level. Perhaps they should try something else like the Nordic model. Also no indication of the incidence of abuse, coercion, abuse, addiction, mental illness and psychological damage.

WhentheRed · 23/08/2013 00:37

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BuffytheReasonableFeminist · 23/08/2013 07:59

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

inwinoweritas · 23/08/2013 10:13

Buffy
Well I will try to answer your points
?I'm sure you're aware???taken aback at your approach?. Ok-I think that for harm reduction (that is both to the individual prostitute) and for the community at large decriminalization of prostitution (at practiced in NZ and NSW) is the way to go.

  1. The reports from both NZ and NSW that I cite show that a decriminalized environment is better for the health and safety of prostitutes. (see for instance Donovan B et al 2010 Improving the health of sex workers in NSW: maintaining success NSW Public Health Bulletin Vol. 213?4

  2. Despite fears to the contrary those reports show that decriminalization has not lead to an overall increase in the level of prostitution (so for instance counts of the number of prostitutes per head of the population in NSW (decriminalized) and Western Australia (criminalized) are similar. In NZ the government took the sensible step of establishing baseline counts before decriminalization was enacted and some years after and found no difference. (this is fully referenced in the NZ reports (see Abel G et al 2009 The impact of decriminalization on the number of Sex workers in New Zealand Jnl Soc. Pol., 38, 3, 515?531 also see Donovan et al(2012). The Sex Industry in New South Wales: a Report to the NSW Ministry of Health. Sydney: Kirby Institute, University of New South Wales-see p16 col 1 for data )

  3. Those systems are not perfect-for instance to assuage community concerns they place restrictions on small owner operated brothels (soobs in NZ parlance) (that is where more than one woman operates), restricting their location away from residential areas, schools churches etc-despite the fact that there is no evidence that discreet soobs have any amenity impact (and I can produce a ton of academic evidence to support that-so for example see Prior& Crofts 2012 Effects of sex premises on neighbourhoods::Residents, local planning and the geographies of a controversial land use . New Zealand Geographer 68, 130?140)

?In my opinion, it should be possible?..Of course you know this?.

  1. Well this is precisely what was done in the report from Denmark that I cited-even though you tend not to place any weight on that as it was prepared for the SFI (the information is in Chapter 4 The section on street prostitutes is pg44-46). The Danish report is valuable as it is quite a large survey-those done by academics and published in the fully peer reviewed literature tend to be smaller as they generally don?t have the resources to mount such a big survey.
inwinoweritas · 23/08/2013 11:41

Flora:
Sorry-what do you mean by structure? Do you mean the legal framework? If so I favour decriminalization-a few of my reasons are outlined in the reply to Buffy.

I don?t believe that the Nordic model (where prostitution is legal but the client criminalized) works-despite the claims of the Swedish government-it is really a political gesture saying that the purchase of sex is unacceptable. My view is that while I may not like the purchase of sex, provided there are women who will supply sex for reward and that there are men who will purchase it, it is best done in an environment that looks after the safety of the women. From my extensive analysis I think that a decriminalized environment is better.

One of the stated aims of the Nordic model is that it will reduce demand-no demand no prostitution. While it is true that immediately after the legislation was passed street prostitution decreased (later to return to almost its original level-the same happens in other countries when the police vigorously enforce anti-kerb crawler legislation). However only a small proportion of Sweden?s sex workers work the street (it is rather cold there), most operates indoors and there is no evidence that has decreased. I don?t want to go into an extensive analysis of the Nordic situation (for which I am sure you will be grateful-but if pressed I can) but will try to deal with the other points you raise.

By abuse do you mean physical and verbal abuse? Or drug abuse? Or abuse as a child which is often claimed to be an antecedent to prostitution? No matter-these are dealt with extensively in the reports that I cite-if you would care to be more specific I will find you the page numbers as I know you are adverse to reading evidence-and will lable it as pimp-punter propaganda-even if it is published in the peer reviewed literature.

But here is some to start with. In the Danish report levels of violence are broken down by sector (street, brothel , private worker) presented in table 10.2 page 232. What it shows is that levels of physical abuse depend on the sector-street work being the most dangerous (59% of street workers were not physically abused in the previous year while 96% of brothel workers were not physically abused) showing indoor work is safer.

Coercion is dealt with table 8.1 p161 of the Danish report the category is ?felt forced by another? Overall 4% felt forced-and these were mainly Street prostitutes where 26% felt forced.(It has to be remembered that in Denmark a large proportion of street prostitutes are foreign-a lot from Africa-the situation in other legislations such as NZ or Australia or the UK is different-the majority of street workers are native born)

Drug abuse is dealt with in the same table-overall 8% worked to fund a drug habit-this was almost entirely due to street workers 54% of those worked to fund a drug habit.

Mental problems are described in a section beginning pg 209 in the Danish report. Overall 65% have no self-reported symptoms of psychological symptoms-once again it is street workers who bear the brunt.

As for psychological damage (do you mean long term or current? Or both?) the Danish report in the qualitative interviews has example of ex-prostitutes who have symptoms (such as cleaning frenzy) and many ex-prostitutes who have no symptoms (pgs 211-213)

Similar (although quantitatively different data) is available for NZ (decriminalized) and Australia (different states have different legal regimes for prostitution-Queensland and Victoria and Capital territories operate a legalized system, NSW a decriminalized system, Western Australia is criminalized. If you would be more specific I can provide chapter and verse for your queries.

BuffytheReasonableFeminist · 23/08/2013 11:42

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BuffytheReasonableFeminist · 23/08/2013 11:44

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BuffytheReasonableFeminist · 23/08/2013 12:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 23/08/2013 12:35

I guess it's because inwino, in his wisdom, has judged them 'unrepresentative'. Hmm

Although, -despite WhentheRed's quite thorough debunking of the NZ report earlier- apparently that can still be accepted as reliable. It's reliable because it supports inwino's belief system about prostitution.

Of course, punters rarely want to talk about punters' behaviour because then they'd have to examine their own. And that's not pretty - doesn't fit with the cognitive dissonance required to enjoy using prostitutes.

SunshineBossaNova · 23/08/2013 15:11

Back on topic: I've had a look at some of the recent posts on the tumblr, one of which says 'if you just want an attractive receptacle for your semen she will do'.

How lovely. Punters respect prostitutes, don't they?

BuffytheReasonableFeminist · 23/08/2013 15:12

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

WhentheRed · 23/08/2013 15:15

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

FloraFox · 23/08/2013 17:34

inwino you claim to have "examined a ton of PhD theses authored many academic papers and reviewed thousands more". I assume that a substantial part, if not all, of this relates to your views on prostitution. You say you are motivated by concerns about agency and harm-reduction. Buffy is of course correct that I was referring to structure in the sociological sense. I am not surprised that a punter/pimp someone has spent such an inordinate amount of time justifying studying prostitution on the basis that it is a fight for the freedom of women to exercise their agency but has spent no time considering the concept of agency and whether it is a legitimate basis for underpinning the wide-spread abuse of women and what you recognise as an unacceptable level of rape of women in prostitution.

Your NZ report has been shown by when to be unreliable. By your own admission, your studies show that indoor prostitution is safer than outdoor prostitution but still unsafe and with an unacceptable level of rape even where legalised. You accepted that outdoor prostitution is markedly less safe and that outdoor prostitution will not be reduced or made more safe by legalising indoor prostitution. Thanks for that.

inwinoweritas · 23/08/2013 19:21

Sabrina
Suppose I had an agenda to show that women were stupid. I could go to Mumsnet and without too much trouble cherry pick a whole lot of entries (which I could then edit slightly) and present them to show that indeed women are stupid. Does that prove that women are stupid? No. Does it prove that that those on Mumsnet (a more limited point) were stupid. No. why?-Because I have cherry picked stupid comments and presented them as typical. Were I to consider the whole of Mumsnet or a random sample I might be able to say x% were stupid (where x might be rather small). Would that prove x% of all women are stupid? Not unless Mumsnet was a random draw of all women-which it is not.

All I can say is that there are some stupid people on Mumsnet. Does that make it clear?

WhentheRed · 23/08/2013 19:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SabrinaMulhollandJjones · 23/08/2013 19:52

inwino - I see the point you're trying to make, I really do. You're trying to use a thinly disguised insult to demonstrate that the invisible man quotes are unrepresentative of all punters.

But, as I've tried to explain to you already - I don't have an agenda to make punters look bad - they do that themselves by paying for prostitutes and by putting reviews on PN. As though women are livestock. That is the despicable thing.

The Invisible Man wants to discuss some of the men's choices. It's not only the criminal actions described, (rape, not being sure if a woman is not trafficked), or even just the really horrible, disrespectful reviews, even the glowingly positive reviews make grim reading. The Invisible Man isn't even casting a judgement - they are asking a question - what about his choices?

Swipe left for the next trending thread