Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Woman’s hour transcript ... (I ❤️ Julie Bindel)

65 replies

FindTheTruth · 05/11/2020 12:47

Womans Hour www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000p0zn
Timestamp 28:00 Julie Bindel responds to growing online sex work during the pandemic, including OnlyFans selling online photos and videos for a monthly subscription (OnlyFans take 20%).

-------------
TRANSCRIPT (JB part of it)

JB: I first want to address the language in this discussion - it is very one sided and belies a position using a term like ‘sex-worker’ instead of women who are prostituted and bland language when we’re talking about pornography, gives the impression that this is a sanitised version of prostitution from behind a camera. You can look at different levels of danger and clearly if there was a choice of on the street v behind a camera… you have to look at it in context. Make an assumption that men will suffer human rights if they can’t have access to women whether it’s direct or indirect. And some of the content on OnlyFans is directed by the punters who are paying is utterly grotesque and harmful to the women, despite the fact this is not seen as dangerous in any way. There are requests for women to dress as school girls, to choke themselves [JANE GARVEY INTERRUPTS], to film themselves defecating

[JANE GARVEY INTERRUPTS if anyone was upset by that perhaps I should have given a warning this would be explicit, so apologies for that…… can we just agree it gives some of these women a little more protection?].

JB: women have been stalked, their content has been dumped on sites such as pornhub, women are psychologically damaged by knowing that there is a permanent record of their prostitution, of their exploitation, that can be circulated evermore. Yes you can look at different levels of harm and risk, but it’s always risky. Prostitution is never safe. What we need to do is take the conversation off the women who are being exploited and who do have a human right, a basic human right to eat and feed their children, and we need to focus on the men, we need to focus on the demand.

JB: She said feminists have not been campaigning for better alternatives for women… we always have. We have been lobbying the government for time immemorial for exit strategies for women because the vast majority of women in prostitution. It’s feminists who want to see the end of prostitution and the criminalisation of demand. That took a case to the high court, which if successful would lead to the decriminalisation of any person in prostitution. So we were the ones who took that case.

Laura: you campaign for criminalisation of the sex industry by the criminalisation of clients, in other countries where that’s happened sex-workers have not been decriminalised. Throughout the pandemic, shocking harassment’s, police raids and arrests and this is not right. If the government are serious about stopping work they have to provide money and resources and not only exiting strategies because what are women existing into. We need the alternatives, the benefits at a level people can live on. Scrapping the 2 child limit and the 5 week wait would be the first thing.

JB: absolutely agree with Laura, we need to provide viable alternatives. It’s interesting though isn’t it? This is actually about women. This is about male violence and male dominance. This is not about men going hungry and starving and not being able to provide for their children during the pandemic, this is actually about women. We need to look at this as a symptom of patriarchy and male violence. That’s what the sex industry is

OP posts:
DrDavidBanner · 05/11/2020 17:49

Before lockdown at my old job some of the people in the office were talking about Only Fans, apparently one of them had read a news article, it may have been the BBC News one. About how great, these young women were being paid thousands of pounds to send images of themselve s walking round in high heels and having men give them open credit cards to treat themselves because they deserved it.

When I tried to point out that this is obviously BS and there must be more to it than that they told me I was daft and people definitely, positively would pay a woman to just wear nice things and look like and nothing more Hmm

Antibles · 05/11/2020 18:16

Such great stuff, thanks for transcribing.

Bindel so right to call out the sanitisation of men's ever increasing depravity.

FindTheTruth · 05/11/2020 18:39

interesting DrDavid perhaps (probably) the article they saw about OnlyFans was sanitised too. JB speaks the uncomfortable truth. Kudos for call them out.

OP posts:
FindTheTruth · 05/11/2020 18:40

It's interesting that a factual description of what prostituted women are doing to earn money is automatically seen as in need of censorship, within the context of a debate on the subject

agree. censoring the truth, glossing over the reality of these women's lives.

OP posts:
FannyCann · 05/11/2020 18:45

DD had her best friend to stay a couple of weeks ago, they both left school a year ago. Her friend filled me in on lots of gossip about their ex schoolmates, and she showed me a few Instagram pages. I was shocked and saddened. One is, apparently, in the top 2% on Only Fans, her Instagram is clearly a teaser for the OF account, with lots of Kardashian style pictures along with some featuring Fetishwear, balaclavas and other repugnant equipment.
Apparently she has earned £90K , presumably in the year or two since leaving school.

We are on the brink of mass unemployment and economic devastation, what other line of work can young women choose that pays that sort of money?

And waking up and getting out of the situation will be very difficult as young women become used to earning at that level, neglecting their further education and not bothering to nurture other career prospects.

The future is grim for our young women.

FannyCann · 05/11/2020 18:48

A post from another recent thread that shows some of the problems:

"I've resurrected an extremely old name for this post as it's all still very close to the bone for me. I had a similar situation a couple of years ago with my uni age daughter, and without going into too much detail it ended up with her being stalked and the police and CPS being involved.

I don't feel comfortable saying too much as it's her story not mine, but it was all horrendous for a while and in some ways still is. And that's the thing that might give your daughter pause for thought. Mine was all very cavalier about it - 'everyone does it these days Mum, it's fine, you don't know anything about it' - but when it went wrong it went badly wrong. As the saying (almost) goes, a stalker is for life, not just for Christmas. The men who are the end users of these services are not always decent, well-adjusted people.

Like lots of girls her age, the internet is an integral part of my daughter's life, which was a factor in how she got drawn into this. Now she can't do anything online with a public profile. All her accounts have maximum privacy settings and she can't use certain platforms. She works in an arts/media field but can't have an online portfolio of her work with contact details because he'll know where she is and where she's been. She can't advertise any freelance services. She can't have a linkedin account. Employers in her field expect to be able to see an online presence and she is hugely disadvantaged by not having that.

She truly thought she was doing something empowering and so much better and cleverer than going out to work for minimum wage in a shop or pub, but just didn't realise the potential implications. I don't think she ever worried about her safety, but I think if she'd been aware that her future freedom could be so compromised she would have thought twice. Once you've given away your privacy and anonymity it's almost impossible to get it back."

Duckwit · 05/11/2020 18:49

I'm another who thinks it's very telling that a 'warning' is needed when a woman does not sugarcoat 'sex work'.

midgebabe · 05/11/2020 19:00

Thanks for this

ChasedByFox · 05/11/2020 19:22

Thank you OP for posting this Thanks

FindTheTruth · 05/11/2020 19:32

I don't think she ever worried about her safety, but I think if she'd been aware that her future freedom could be so compromised she would have thought twice. Once you've given away your privacy and anonymity it's almost impossible to get it back.

Thank you FannyCann. How many women are in this situation? I really feel for her. girls need warnings. how dare WH sanitise this

OP posts:
FindTheTruth · 05/11/2020 19:33

God, I wish there was a 'Feminist Hour' on mainstream radio or TV. Let's have some truth

OP posts:
DrDavidBanner · 05/11/2020 19:33

Its really worrying, DS was telling me more than one of his female uni friends had done this over lockdown as the normal opportunities weren't there for them.

I remember watching a docu about cam girls ages ages ago now and what struck me was now they have to compromise themselves more and more to earn their money and how it eats into their everyday lives and relationships.

FindTheTruth · 05/11/2020 20:31

what struck me was now they have to compromise themselves more and more to earn their money and how it eats into their everyday lives and relationships.

Real consequences. not a life any one would want.

OP posts:
quixote9 · 09/11/2020 07:40

Floralbunting: Yes, keep the details of 'sex work' hazy and undefined. Let people fill in the blanks that make them comfortable. Let them be cossetted with cutesy notions based on Pretty Woman or Diary of a Call Girl, and think that cam work is like doing a work Zoom call in some sexy undies. Blech.

Funny, that. Sex work is work, but it's the only work that's too gross to discuss in "polite" society, apparently.

FindTheTruth · 09/11/2020 17:58

yeah, if the work's too gross to discuss, it's too gross to be 'work'

OP posts:
FindTheTruth · 05/12/2020 18:00

Now she can't do anything online with a public profile.

She can't have an online portfolio
She can't advertise any freelance services.
She can't have a linkedin account.

It's a sentence for life 😖

The effect of this is to more than halve her income over her lifetime... (more with the way the economy is going)

online is where you make money and/or have a presence to get employment or money, so that fact she can't be seen online will affect her for life.

unless she changes name.

OP posts:
jennywhitehorses · 31/03/2021 16:46

Could someone help me out here? I have been trying to find out more about this court case, the one in the high court where feminists tried to get the decriminalisation of any person in prostitution. I can't find anything through Google, I've tried different combinations of keywords.

AaronStampler · 31/03/2021 16:56

I imagine it's this. A quick search hasn't uncovered the outcome.

AaronStampler · 31/03/2021 16:59

After more searching it appears they were successful in removing the requirement to disclose spent convictions, but not otherwise.

Olderstyle1 · 31/03/2021 20:10

I'm pretty sure that convictions stay on record for 20 years or more - my recollection is that the woman concerned (fabulous, courageous, inspirational advocate for girls and women) was not able to get her record wiped, even though it was accepted that she had been groomed in to prostitution. I know that the lawyers were very disappointed.

ValancyRedfern · 31/03/2021 22:21

It's striking to me that Jane Garvey didn't expect to need to give a content warning on a feature about prostitution. How far in fantasy land do you need to be to think it will be a light and fluffy chat with no disturbing content?!

MargaritaPie · 03/04/2021 01:01

What do you mean "decriminalise prostitutes" when selling sexual services isn't illegal in Scotland/England/Wales?

Running/managing a brothel however is, which means if prostitutes (2 or more) work in the same place (even if it isn't at the same time) they are committing the crime. Interestingly, this is still an offence in countries that have the "Nordic model".

jennywhitehorses · 06/04/2021 14:49

That took a case to the high court, which if successful would lead to the decriminalisation of any person in prostitution. So we were the ones who took that case.

The High Court case had nothing to do with 'the decriminalisation of any person in prostitution'. Decriminalisation of prostitutes means not arresting them. There are some feminists who do want to genuinely decriminalise prostitutes. Radical Feminists like Julie Bindel say they want to but turn a blind eye to the arrest of women working together for safety in Nordic model countries.

When groups like Amnesty International expose this, they are accused of working for pimps. When the campaigners for the Nordic model are forced to give their opinion they say that we have to continue to arrest women who work together. In different places on the Nordic Model Now! site they say this. For example:-

"On balance, I do not support legislation to explicitly decriminalise small groups of women operating from the same premises, because it would legitimise and normalise prostitution."

I don't trust anything that Julie Bindel says. She said on Woman's Hour in 2012 that when she went to Nevada she found 'learning disabled women who had been double pimped'. Jane Garvey was shocked.

Yet this is not what she had written in her report. In her report she wrote that she had found one learning disabled woman, who she called Sindy, who had not been double pimped. I find it inconceivable that if it was really true that she had found learning disabled women in the plural being pimped she would not have put that in her report.

MargaritaPie · 06/04/2021 14:57

What is "double pimped"?

everythingcrossed · 06/04/2021 16:05

jenny - you sound strangely disappointed that Julie Bindel "only" found one LD woman who was a prostitute.

Swipe left for the next trending thread