The fucking Guardian again

[GCAcademic]

Just tried to comment on this article by pointing out the issues at Holbeck, down the road from where the author works:

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jun/03/uk-feminists-embrace-sex-workers-rights#comment-129762450

Only pro-prostitution comments are allowed, it seems. Mine was deleted very quickly. Men (and their inevitably privileged, middle-class, cool girl, penis-rights supporters) are the only people allowed to participate btl. They are now pre-moderating comments to ensure that us women don’t get ideas above our station and begin to think that we are anything more than commodities and spunk receptacles.

Fuck her for using a "turn of phrase" about women's lives and women's bodies, .

Farking 'ell the mansplaining is thick and heavy tonight.

ahem

I find it so very bizarre when pro-sex abuse for money apologists wax lyrical about the situations in countries where there is much prostitution because there is much poverty, that it somehow proves that prostitution is a neutral choice like any other desperate means of survival. Picking food out of bins is also a means of poverty survival. But suggesting that starving people do it because it's a legitimate choice, rather than because it's an example of an exploitative system that keeps people down is obvious self-serving bullshit.

Picking food out of bins is also a means of poverty survival. But suggesting that starving people do it because it's a legitimate choice, rather than because it's an example of an exploitative system that keeps people down is obvious self-serving bullshit.

That's correct. So the solution is to deal with extreme poverty so that people who don't want to work in the sex industry will never have to do so.

dwarsuts Turn of phrase? Oh well, that’s ok then, you’ve sold me or maybe not so fucking much. Just stop now.

It’s chillingly tone-deaf and reductive of the actuality of these women’s lives to describe anything about it as a fucking privilege. These are not some kind of community outreach workers selflessly endangering themselves for a few dollars a time the better to inform other women about gendered violence. They have no other choice if they want to eat and pay the rent. Let’s be bloody real here.

They have NO other choice.

And maybe that’s what we should be addressing rather than turning more and more blind eyes and pretending it’s a job like any other. Is not. No one dreams of growing up to be a prostitute. No one.

I’ve had several comments disappear from the Guardian despite being relevant to the thread and not being anything particularly controversial other than pointing out inconsistencies. They’re a completely corrupt rag like all other papers but at lessst the others aren’t as sanctimonious. If you want to get an idea of what is happening read multiple sources. The best free newspaper websites are the Guardian and the Mail which both write bollocks individually but give you a steer when reading both at the same time

I thought it was bs but I also read "privileged" as meaning we should give their opinion the most weight as having lived experience.
Which I don't necessarily agree with actually, for a variety of reasons one being that there is rarely one voice and opinion from a whole group of people, but I am pretty sure that is what she meant, not that they were lucky to have experienced violence.

When you're talking about women who have been beaten, raped and killed then perhaps it's wise to choose your words more carefully. that standard woke academentia.

According to her logic the forty-nine women in prostitution Robert Pckton would be the most privileged to teach us about male violence. Except they can't. Because they're dead.

She accuses feminists of "violence" against prostituted women, but completely erases the violence of pimps and johns, the kind that actually kills and maims women, filing it under the heading "gendered". Who commits the actual violence, men do, not that you'd know from reading this article.

The Guardian is the left's Daily Mail. They're just as smug and sure of their own rightness.

From another thread, 51 women suspected of being prostituted or drug addicts murdered in Chicago. Killer/killers remain at large:

www.fox32chicago.com/news/local/serial-killer-in-chicago-51-women-murdered-by-strangulation-since-2001

“The Guardian is the left’s daily mail” but of course.
As a Tory of many years’ standing (yes I know, it’s not going great right now) I got so frustrated with the delusion that the left was somehow more feminist. The left is now so flagrantly misogynistic that people now seem to be seeing the light. I’m glad. But it’s imperative they are kept out of power. That might mean holding your nose and biting tactically. I am sorry. But Corbyn and his accomplices must not ever form a government. It would be unbelievably awful for women and girls if they did.

Biting? Voting! But bite tactically too if you want (as long as you bite the right people).
Bite early, bite often

I've always known the left was misogynistic. I would never vote Tory in a million years.

Your choice, but that may open the way for some genuine enemies of women to gain power. The hard left is already spreading this poison. How much worse will it get when they are in power?

Please take your propaganda for the Tories (genuine enemies of women) out of a conversation where the extreme male violence against prostituted women is being discussed.

As a Tory of many years’ standing (yes I know, it’s not going great right now) I got so frustrated with the delusion that the left was somehow more feminist. The left is now so flagrantly misogynistic that people now seem to be seeing the light. I’m glad. But it’s imperative they are kept out of power. That might mean holding your nose and biting tactically. I am sorry. But Corbyn and his accomplices must not ever form a government. It would be unbelievably awful for women and girls if they did.

Hello llama,

I dont agree with your political positions, but I agree with you that there is nothing inherently left wing about feminism. I've always thought that feminism appears to incorporate a mixture of different left and right opinions, and cant really be categorised as one or the other. Rather, it stands as it's own ideology. Thank you for leaving that comment.

What about all those murdered women dwatut?. Anything to say about them, or are you just going to ignore them like Angryllama did?

What about all those murdered women dwatut?. Anything to say about them, or are you just going to ignore them like Angryllama did?

What's there to say? Obviously killing women is bad.The answer there is to remove laws which force women into vulnerable positions; abolish laws which criminalise multiple sex workers in the same building, so then they can work with their friends for safety and protection. A system which forces men to identify themselves when paying for ssx would also help, so if they do commit a criminal offence they will easily be caught.

The solution is to look at countries where sex workers are safest and copy what they're doing.

"What's there to say? Obviously killing women is bad."

Well not obviously as your first response to that convo was to discuss the relaitve merits of woman-hating parties. Priorities, eh?

Could you explain to me the "privileged position that all those dead women hold with regards to teaching us about male violence? How do we listen to them when they have no voice? I'm unable to see it .

so then they can work with their friends for safety and protection

Doesn't work. Men are too dangerous:

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/6567989.stm

We'll have to find another way to keep violent rapist murderous men away from prostituted women.

When you're talking about women who have been beaten, raped and killed then perhaps it's wise to choose your words more carefully. that standard woke academentia.

You know, you don't have to agree with someone to give them a little grace when they choose an awkward way of phrasing something. Not everyone is equally talented at communication. Jumping on stuff like that as a regular tactic to get the upper hand in a discussion isn't a way forward in any sense, it's not even a good way to discredit people as others tend to sympathise - they can all to easily imagine being called out themselves when they misspeak, because we all do it from time to time. All it does is convince others you are a jerk and don't really care what people are saying or thinking, and your own ideas aren't good enough to stand on their own.

Well not obviously as your first response to that convo was to discuss the relaitve merits of woman-hating parties. Priorities, eh?

Yes, because I'm sure everyone here already knows that violence against sex workers is a problem, and you don't need me to explain that.

Could you explain to me the "privileged position that all those dead women hold with regards to teaching us about male violence? How do we listen to them when they have no voice? I'm unable to see it.

Listen to sex workers who are alive, listen to sex workers who have survived violence, listen to the friends of those who are dead who can speak on their behalf.

We'll have to find another way to keep violent rapist murderous men away from prostituted women.

How? We can put violent people in prison where they can't harm anyone else, but if a violent person is released and they haven't been rehabilitated (if the justice system fails us, for example), they will be free to offend again. Then there's also the issue of a first-time offender... we could stop women from working as sex workers, but that would mean criminalising them and I find it ethically abhorrent to criminalise a sex worker.

And since you brought up Pickton, I'll mention that those who are advocating on behalf of those women have said we should listen to them and their experience, though obviously they don't mean directly.

You know, you don't have to agree with someone to give them a little grace when they choose an awkward way of phrasing something.

When it comes to people like this erasing male violence against prostituted women, there's no compromise. Even if it is graceless. There are things that are more important. Women are being killed.

Not everyone is equally talented at communication.

She's being published in the Guardian as an expert on this. She should be able to communicate clearly. Anyway I think she did make her priorities clear.

Jumping on stuff like that as a regular tactic to get the upper hand in a discussion isn't a way forward in any sense, it's not even a good way to discredit people as others tend to sympathise - they can all to easily imagine being called out themselves when they misspeak, because we all do it from time to time.

Is that what you see? Someone trying to get the upper hand? No I'm angry at the way she's erasing male violence against prostituted women whilst accusing anti-pornstitution feminists of violence against prostituted women. I don't notice you complaining about her taking an easy way to discredit us.

All it does is convince others you are a jerk and don't really care what people are saying or thinking, and your own ideas aren't good enough to stand on their own.

Calling me a jerk. How graceless. My ideas are fine thank you, they've convinced quite a lot of women.

Do the people advocating for legalised prostitution realise that what they are arguing for is Robert Pickton or any man like him to access women's bodies as long as they don't attack them, except of course they will attack them? The dregs of society, the worst of men use prostituted women, yet we expect these vulnerable women to open their bodies to them.

We keep men like this away from prosittuted women by cimrinalising johns and pimps and supporting prostituted women out of the life.

You know, you don't have to agree with someone to give them a little grace when they choose an awkward way of phrasing something. Not everyone is equally talented at communication.

Oh stop it. This isn't a case of being a prick for picking on someone's spelling, grammar, vocabulary after they post on mumsnet. Not even close.

No. If you claim to be an academic, in this case an associate professor no less, and put yourself forward as a public spokesperson for a marginalised group as in writing and lecturing on the subject then I'd say it's pretty much a job requirement if you are a professional communicator to have at least some modicum of talent at communication.

She's protecting men and advocating for their interests. That's what she's up to and it shows in her language choices.