[LAF] FW: gender issue

Sat Aug 1 00:08:23 UTC 2009

From: joy_helbin at hotmail.com
To: steveash_2001 at yahoo.co.uk
Subject: RE: [LAF] gender issue
Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 00:07:58 +0000

Steve

The problem is the society we live in treats women to a large extent as a resource for the benefit of men; for sex, cooking, cleaning, picking up after them, etc.  Unfortunately the anarchist movement also has this tendency hence expecting women to supply sexual access rather than engaging with women as equal human beings.  The anarchist solution I propose is to drop the hierarchies which exist between those who feel entitled to purchase sexual satisfaction by means of using women as a commodity, and those who feel bound one way or another to serve these entitled people.  I am asking for men to stop treating women as a commodity and engage with them as human beings of equal worth with themselves.  For example, not to demand sexual service from women but to learn how women achieve sexual satisfaction and step out of the way of their achieving it, stop discouraging women from fulfilling their own sexual needs, and stop demanding women take time out from their own sexual desires in order to satisfy privileged men's sexual demands.

BTW, what are the "few practical criticisms" other feminists have with what you have been saying, Steve?

I will not speak at the ABF LAF workshop as a "prohibitionist" because I do not agree with prohibiting "sex workers".  I have stated clearly already that my aim is abolishing prostitution, not prohibiting sex workers.  In this society people do what they have to do to gain an income and sex workers are not the problem, the problem is those who feel entitled to sexual satisfaction at the expense of others.  Secondly, I want a world where prostitution does not exist because it does not promote sexual freedom for all.

For the avoidance of doubt, I state here clearly that I am not opposing your decision to arrange sex workers to speak at the ABF LAF workshop, I only wonder why you have done that.  Since I understand anarchism to mean no hierarchies I would welcome a workshop discussing and perhaps demonstrating a belief in sexual liberation for all, not just for those who can pay for it, and not just promoting the study of men's sexuality at the expense of women's, and honouring not just one type of sexuality but everyone's, including those who do not wish to participate in sex with others.  Sex workers, in particular prostitutes, by necessity make it their expertise to set aside their own needs and desires to fulfill instead the sexual demands of others.  This is what women have traditionally been trained to do in a patriarchal society so that is nothing new and feeds the gender hierarchy.  Ana Lopez in the link Ian sent recently, (repeated here for ease of reference)
http://www.wsm.ie/story/2390
stated that people become and remain sex workers for many reasons (mostly monetary) but sexual satisfaction of the sex worker herself was not mentioned:  "the reason all of us are in this industry is that we need to pay our bills at the end of each month."  I have no quarrel with this, it is only logical and necessary in the current society.  However, that does not change the fact that to fight for the rights of prostitute-users is promoting prostitution, which in turn condones the use by one section of society of another section of society in a power imbalance as only one section has their sexual rights recognised and fulfilled.

Ana quite rightly spoke in terms of worker's rights and obtaining full worker's rights alongside all other workers which is only fair in the society we have at the moment but she made no mention of sexual liberation for the sex worker, because that will not happen in prostitution as sex workers are waiving their sexual satisfaction rights when they supply sexual access as a service for money.

Another point Ana Lopez makes is:

"So if we treat it as any other work, as a labour issue, then we can find solutions. And solutions are to be found in eliminating the exploitative conditions and not eliminating the industry altogether. That what you do in other exploitative industries also applies here. Women and transgender people get exploited in many other industries unfortunately. But the response of the feminist and trade union movement in relation to those other industries is to eliminate the exploitation and not the industry itself. We wanted to get in line with all other workers."

This is incorrect.  In other occupations, dangerous practices certainly are eliminated; eg, when asbestos was found to be harmful all workers were banned from working with it and employers were prosecuted if they exploited asbestos workers.  No arguments were accepted from employers that their employees agreed to risk their health in order to stay in the industry.

I want a sociey where there is sexual liberation for all, and recognition for that liberation.  This will not happen whilst prostitution persists because by definition the payer is choosing the people they will 'have sex with,' choosing the time when they themselves feel like it, and choosing the act(s) they will perform or require the paid person/people to perform; the only real choice the sex worker has is the opportunity to turn down the job if it appears too onerous, but then they lose income if they do that.  The point of prostitute-users paying is that they feel entitled, by paying, not to have to consider the human sexual needs of the person they are paying at all.  This is not anarchistic.  For this reason I personally would not stand in a debate on prostitution with sex workers because I am not interested in prolonging, let alone promoting, the hierarchies (there is a hierarchy when one group has their sexual demands met whilst the other group not merely goes without, but is expected to satisfy the entitled group without claiming satisfaction for themselves).  This is inequality and in the present society it is inequality on the basis of gender moreover.

One thing Ana Lopez pointed out was that fashion models are given respect by society but not sex workers and she thinks it is because society views sex workers as immoral.  I didn't understand that because I have never thought of prostitutes as being immoral, that seems very strange to me, and if society think that prostitutes are sexually immoral I wonder why, because they are not expecting to receive sexual satisfaction.  I always wondered why women get blamed but not the men who demand their sexual services.  Ana explains, "And I told my mother [who worked as a child minder, organising a small group of others] you are the equivalent of a brothel mother, you are organising groups of women to do something that in our ideal society would be done for love and not for money."  It appears to boil down to the idea that women are on the earth to service men for love so, if they demand money for granting men sexual access to their bodies, then they are immoral because they should do it for love, ie for free but I admit I'm not clear on this 'moral' argument against prostitution, certainly not any moral accusation against women.

So another important reason I would not discuss prostitution with pro-prostitution sex workers is that they have made it their profession to find out how to sexually satisfy other people.  I would have thought a more appropriate speaker for an anarchist bookfair would be someone who is practised in pleasing themselves, who has spent time consistently and conscientiously critiquing society's demands that women always put others' needs before their own and, in the context of sexual liberation, someone who has particularly spent time putting their sexual needs or desires before others' sexual demands.  The kind of talk you appear to be proposing, Steve, would I think be more in line with workers' rights or law reform or something, which would shore up men's privilege in the current society, not liberation because promoting prostitution would not liberate anyone except those with money to buy sexual access to other human beings in lieu of engaging in reciprocity.

Joy

> Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2009 02:12:34 +0000
> From: steveash_2001 at yahoo.co.uk
> To: laf at lists.aktivix.org
> Subject: [LAF] gender issue
> 
> 
> I really dont understand what the problems are here, you haven't even begun to give an anarchist solution to the 'issues' you raise and really have no idea what either of you are talking about. If you like you can say what you oppose in clear English and how you propose rectifying the problem.
> 
> All you've done is denounce porn but given no examples of how you would tackle the problems apart from 'banning it', which is impossible.
> 
> While I've given many examples of how women can free themselves from the exploitation, patriarchy and gender stereotypes of commercial porn and sex work and explore their own sexuality within anarchist or voluntary porn and sex work. I've no interest in how they do that, an individuals sexuality and lifestyle is there own private business as long as it doesnt harm anyone (which voluntary sex work doesnt do) and thats it, there is no 'women's sexuality' btw everyone's sexuality is unique. I've tried to find other feminists that agree with what your saying but I can't, they mostly agree with what I've been saying with only a few practical criticisms.
> 
> 
> I've arranged some sex worker speakers to talk on this at the anarchist bookfair, it would be nice if Joy spoke for the prohibitionist side or however you want to argue it. 
> 
> Steve
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> LAF mailing list
> LAF at lists.aktivix.org
> https://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/laf

Share your memories online with anyone you want. Learn more.
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live Messenger: Happy 10-Year Anniversary—get free winks and emoticons.
http://clk.atdmt.com/UKM/go/157562755/direct/01/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aktivix.org/pipermail/laf/attachments/20090801/67c0f846/attachment.htm>