Home > Feminism Fight Club > Like A Pack Of Wild Whores

Like A Pack Of Wild Whores



I posted some of this as a response to this post at Bound, not Gagged here’s the first few lines (of the original post, that is):

One thing I’ve noticed again and again is that when men make online comments in any way supporting sex workers (like on news articles or major blogs), they always hasten to add that they have never seen a sex worker and have no need of it. Obviously, they believe client-stereotypes (e.g. all clients are ugly losers) and feel a strange need to pretend they’re not clients.

I wonder why they even think the disclaimer is relevant — can’t they, as arguably intelligent people — support sex workers with or without vested interest?

but I started rambling and posted an extended version here:

I’ve thought about this before… I can put myself into the mindset of all of those guys, the ones who are ashamed, or who don’t want to get hassled, or who don’t want to have their arguments weakened by a self-professed client status. Those are all valid considerations, … for whatever that’s worth.

But, the thing is, if this was an issue of homosexuality, and the tsk-tsk-ers were conservative anti-gay christians – we would all just laugh at their ignorance and brush them off with a flippant jeer of “you actually believe that crap?”

That’s what irritates me – the way sex workers/advocates/pro-sex sorts are still stuck trailing behind the antis asking them to agree with us, pretty please with sugar on top. Friggin social construction, dontcha know.

We are right. They are wrong. More offense. Less defense.

sigh… I’m sounding angry,… well…. wait… I think I might actually be angry. Shocker. :P

Wasn’t it a few months ago that some actor/singer dude was celebrated for not answering whether he was gay or not, and he said, because it shouldn’t matter? That’s what we need from the people who say they support sex workers rights, no more of the “i know a sex worker but she’s not a junkie/victim/idiot…”, or the “I’ve never visited one, but…” no more qualifying and clarifying. More of “you are a fool if you think sex workers need rescue more than rights.”

There should be no need to tell that you’re a client, because the argument stands on its own. If we were LGBTQ activists, and they were right-wingers – we’d tell them to go back to bible class if they wanted to spew their homophobia…

The Jezebel thread, for example… and there was another just before it about “stag parties fueling sex trafficking” or some bullshit… and I guess we all know shit like that is posted almost every week on Jezebel. One editor will seem to be supportive, and then the next is unsupportive, to keep us all dancing like puppets, and Jezebel has NEVER taken an actual editorial stance on the issue of sexual rights. If they have, then they fucking suck at stancing.

I guess if they came right out and said that lofty philosophical discussions are a bullshit copout when used to deny people their human rights, then they might not have such ‘lively’ discussions all the time. Christ, how much revenue does Jezebel make from sex worker issues? It’s sex worker issues constantly, which routinely generate the highest comment and view counts, and all the while they never come out and fight for sex workers to be given their professional rights. They got theirs…. I guess.

But more than that… back to playing the offense… I wish I paid more attention, I never notice the threads until they’ve been up for a day or two, but I know lots of other SWR types are there too, though I don’t know their nicknames. Admittedly, I don’t much hang around those places anymore, hurts my feewings, so I just take a quick look and then post my righteously indignant comment and leave in a huff, so maybe I’m just not noticing the awesome battles going on…

We have to descend on these threads like a pack of wild whores, but NOT to argue with the other side… oh no…. we need to meet up with each other and crack jokes back and forth and make pithy observations about people’s ridiculous assumptions, and pass judgment about how those “certain feminists” that oppose sex work decriminalization, and more importantly destigmatization, are causing women to be raped and murdered. Though in our case, we’d be telling the truth.

That is how THEY send the message to OUR supporters that they should be ashamed and embarrassed and sorry for what they’ve done. They don’t wait for some sacrificial soul to stumble in and declare his support for sex worker’s rights, they make sure he hears it when he enters the room, so he knows not to even dare open his mouth….

So, yeah, descending like a pack of wild whores… How can we do that? Is that what people use their twitters for, to stay informed and plan online political maneuverings? Maybe I should try to figure out how that works.

  1. 01/25/2010 at 6:25 AM

    Love the “pack of wild whores” phrase. I envision a biker gang of sex workers, but that’s just me.

    Seriously…we have certainly tossed around the idea of doing this. Two problems: getting the word out because there are a TON of such articles, every single day, all over the world (subscribe to Google Alerts with a few relevant keywords and you’ll see what I mean) and secondly, not all the wild whores out there have the time to follow these threads or the inclination to register on every damn site so they can comment. Since wild whores aren’t corporate-sponsored (like many radfem academics), we have to spend time working for our income.

    Love the idea. No one has come up with an easy solution on accomplishing it.

    Also, EXCELLENT point about Jezebel articles on sex work significantly funding the Jezebel website.


    • FW
      01/25/2010 at 6:51 AM

      Biker gang sounds perfect, we’d have them running scared.

      I suspected somebody else musta had that idea before. I’m spoiled by my cats, compared to them I always come up with the best ideas. :)

  2. 01/26/2010 at 6:47 AM

    Envisioning the biker gang now….


  3. Tiffany Talbot
    02/03/2010 at 4:31 AM

    Any person with the audacity to identify themselves publicly as a “feminist” while simultaneously trying to snuff out movements (such as decriminalization and destigmatization) that are aimed at decreasing violence towards women is quite simply a hypocrite. It’s somewhat similar to the twisted reasoning used by “pro-lifers” who blow up abortion clinics.
    I wonder if “wild whores” are considered more of a delicacy than the domestic variety?

    • FW
      02/04/2010 at 5:42 PM

      I never understand how they can’t see that hypocrisy, or how they just don’t get the logic that prohibition=worse situation for the vulnerable.


  1. No trackbacks yet.
Comments are closed.

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,399 other followers

%d bloggers like this: