babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
also, we were funded by vancity, we weren't"bragging about it" its nice when you make me seem pathetic though, as if all i can do brag....we did it, we incorporated....we were funded by vancity....
really, i take exception to being diminished and belittled in this way. i work my ass off, we get funding...just like the occupational health and safety training is done and was funded by the health authority. apparenty we are not as uncredible or pathetic as you would have people believe.
is it so hard for you to believe we have support for our plan and it is going forward? or do you just enjoy upsetting me.
i question the credibility of anyone who is willing to harm a sex worker to "save" a sex worker.
again,lee.... i would like to ask that people do not refer to the men who kill us by name.
we refer to it as the trial in the case of the missing women and it the other case, we could refer to as the trial in case of the torture of women in the DTES.....as explained it is our assertion that fame is a contributing factor in these crimes and so we respectfully request people do not use those persons names.
http://members.shaw.ca/pdg/donald_michel_bakker.html
a link to a story about the trial in the case of the man who tortured women in the DTES.
indoors is no safer than out of doors then, contrary to some findings otherwise?
Externalities to the situation are not killing and torturing women, men are killing and torturing women.
Indeed, in my thinking about the statistics posted that show an alleged increase in deaths, (I say alleged only because there was no link given) which were stated to be from lack of indoor facilties, it would seem to me, that what they really show is, that the more focus society puts upon male's ejaculatory responses, the higher the death rates for women involved in prostitution have climbed, over the years.
remind said: " the more focus society puts upon male's ejaculatory responses,
the higher the death rates for women involved in prostitution have climbed, over the years."
1. why would increased "focus" cause a higher death rate? I don't see a connection between focus and death rate.
2. how do we know death rates have increased?
Susan posted either in this thread or in the other one, a non-linked table showing increases in prostitute death statistics going back to the 60's.
It shows quite clearly that since the advent into society of a focus on men's penus pleasure, women have been objectified more, the more objectification and marginalization occuring the less humanity is felt towards the target group, and the more disposable people become.
History has shown this to be true.
It is also backed up by sociological studies
Fair question though I suppose, but one should ask; why should the closing of show lounges for example increase prostitute deaths?
Perhaps we should mount a campaign against Viagra, and all the media that promote it. We should tell the men (and their wives) when the willy stops working, "to live with it".
Susan posted a link a while back that indicated an increase in the number of sex worker deaths and correlated the increase to more restrictive legislation regarding sex work. As some one that works in statistics I consider it a bit problematic to draw any conclusions from the numbers she posted for a variety of reasons. Part of me wouldn't mind seeing the link again to get a better sense of the numbers since I only gave them a cursory view last time.
On the other hand, I'm getting rather tired of seeing both sides trot out statistics that are going to be at least some what inaccurate since the entity they're examining is by it's nature difficult to pin down.
At their best statisics tend to offer a vague idea of the scope and shape of a situation. They're often much less informative than people assume them to be because reporting can often be inaccurate and apparent relationships are almost always conflated with factors not considered in the analysis. A dogmatic following of the numbers can be very misleading.
Statistics can inform us to a degree in this issue but a definitive answer as to the right approach isn't going to from them. Personally I'd like to see less numbers in the discussion and better effort of both sides to address each others concerns.
There are lies, and then there are statistics...
P-sto - I was thinking of starting a thread about the common grounds covered by both sides. Maybe you can?
Thanks for the link.
Do not think a brothel or a co-op would have stopped these actions, he was right up front about what he was going to do apparently....and indeed the following indicates that it was just accepted as so, so what if it was indoors, in room they rented, the same thing would have occured to these women.
Long thread.