divide and conquer strategy is working

105 posts / 0 new
Last post
Kaspar Hauser

Frustrated Mess wrote:

So I can't be a labour activist without being pro-union, but I can be a feminist without being opposed to the commodification of the female body and mind. Okay. Now, can I be both a labour activist and represent and promote a company union?

It's pretty easy to define a union, but it's rather difficult to define the commodification of the female body and mind in such a way that doesn't automatically exclude every form of labour in a capitalist system. Are female bodybuilders commodifying their bodies? Are women who so scientific research for corporations, nonprofits, and governments commodifying their minds? If so, then should feminists automatically be opposed to female bodybuilding and performing scientific research? How about construction work, boxing, auto repair, or military service? The problem is that under capitalism everything we do is commodified. That's the nature of our economic system. Sex work doesn't commodify women more than any of these examples.


Stargazer wrote:

A woman's body is hers. She can make her own decisions as to what to do with it.

She can indeed. As another poster put it, whatever a women does with her body, including sexual activities of all sorts, is completely up to her. When there is an exchange of money, this transaction enters into the public realm and is legislated and regulated.

Stargazer wrote:

I think the Charter Challenge has legs and will stand up. I am NOT in favour of criminalizing women who do sex work. What will we accomplish for our fellow sisters by doing that? It is not going to disappear so make it safer for the women doing it. I think that is a big priority.

Women are already criminalized and I've said here and elsewhere that I support decriminalizing women in this position. I do not support decriminalizing their pimps, customers and all others who stand to profit. This drive is all about unfettered capitalism, in my opinion.

stargazer wrote:

I'm still confused by your opening post Loretta as I feel that it is directly about susan and can be interpreted as her trying to divide and conquer. In fact, I can find no other answer for your opening post except that.

I do wonder about that -- that's what the thread is about. I don't find anything particularly feminist in her views, not just on this (which is a matter of discussion) but in other ways -- sympathy for single fathers and support for business deregulation are two examples, without even considering the issue of sex work.

stargazer wrote:

Lest we forget the porn business, which is rife with exploitation and it is entirely legal. So why are the anti-prostitution crowd not addressing this? Instead the focus is on why, how or when a woman can do what she likes with her vagina in prostitution/sex work.

The subject here, because of the posts that susan davis initiated, because of the court challenge and because of the complete forum in support of a position, is decrim/legalizing prostitution.  



susan davis susan davis's picture

i welcome your perspective rework!please stay!

time bandit.....lol i knew it was a red herring  am just jokin...re:honor

evidence of what; that remind said highend escorts don't require social justice? i know wokers on street who are former feature exotic dancers....we are all contected and the lack of jobs drives people to work in areas they are uncomfortable with as well as forcing some into the dangerous street level trade.....

or do you believe closing 20 show lounges has had no impact in vancouver? and the raids and closure of businesses else where has had no impact? if you were an auto worker and they closed the plant where you worked what might you be forced to do? work that is more dangerous? work beyond your comfort level?perhaps even sex work?

loss of jobs always affects workers.....i guess you missed the statistics of numbers of murders of vancouver sex workers by year increasing parallel to actions imposed against thhe sex industry...


Research shows that the Communicating Law has had little impact on reducing levels of street-based sex work in Canada, and in fact contributes to the impacts on sex workers, residents and businesses (Lowman, 1989). The number of homicides of sex workers in Canada between 1960 and 2000 reveals an escalation of violence since this law was enacted in 1985.
























1975- the year supper clubs were no longer allowed to "tolerate "the presence of prostitutes in the club

1985- law revisions leading to legal frame work we see today

1991- workers not allowed to rent hotel rooms in the DTES by the hour

these are facts. the loss of safe work environments has completely destabilized the safety of sex workers. 

i did post evidene of WCB.....?

it is a little frustrating to have to repeat this stuff over and over. perhaps if people would browse previous posts or posts in the sex worker rights forum i would be less of a repeating of posts.....


Long thread.


Topic locked