What a crock of shit. I could write up my own opinion on this, but why bother if User JoyceArthur has done better than I could?
What a vile and wildly inaccurate piece. Murphy can't see past her personal loathing of sex work to see reality, much less actually support human rights for sex workers.
When she says "The very idea of prostitution is one that says women are not fully human", I can’t help but wonder if SHE thinks sex workers are not fully human. When she says "they are things that men have the right to use and abuse," I can’t help but wonder if SHE believes that sex workers are things and that men are abusive and exploitive by nature. When she says "men's sexual pleasure is more important than women's humanity", I can’t help but wonder if SHE believes that women who sell sex lose their humanity (because women are defined by their sexuality?) When she says "a john … is, in fact, paying for the right not to respect her", I can’t help but wonder if SHE's the one who is unable to respect sex workers for selling sex.
When she said in another Rabble article that sex workers “deserve better and are more than a series of holes for you [johns] to penetrate on a whim,” I can’t help but wonder if she herself sees sex workers as a lower class of sub-humans who really ARE nothing more than a series of holes to penetrate – but who can better themselves if they would only leave sex work. (...)
Like every other prohibitionist on the planet, Murphy has obviously not bothered to read or understand Amnesty's draft resolution. (http://tasmaniantimes.com/imag... It mentions women 16 times, for example. Amnesty consulted extensively with sex workers and sex-worker led groups – mostly women. Amnesty conducted years of research and found that criminalization in any form causes harm because it deprives sex workers of equal protection under the law. Its draft resolution is clear that trafficking and exploitation are illegal and must remain so, and that any criminalization of sex work, including the Swedish model, exacerbates stigma, marginalization, violence, exploitation, and trafficking. Frankly, I trust the evidence far more than baseless scare-mongering opinions like: “The industry requires exploitation and violence is inherent to the system of prostitution. The system is violent. It is exploitative. It is about male abuse of female bodies. Prostitution is harm.”
Murphy also has trouble with facts, claiming that “The term [sex worker] ensures men remain invisible and unaccountable in all of this, despite the fact that it is only men who drive the industry and only men who are responsible for the harm.” The sex industry is, IN FACT, driven by women, because they do most of the sex work and make most of the money. In a Canadian study, 81% of sex workers and 83% of clients surveyed agreed that the providers set the terms of the transactions. Of course, there’s plenty of men in the industry too, but large numbers of women work as third parties (many of them former sex workers), plenty of men and transgender people are sex workers, and couples and women are frequent customers of sex workers. Also, sex workers not infrequently rob or even assault their clients, so the “exploitation” can work both ways. Murphy’s hardline male/female binary model of prostitution exposes her almost total lack of knowledge about sex workers and the industry, which in turn raises serious questions about her credibility when making pronouncements about it.
Amnesty is a respected human rights group, and it will survive this just like it survived its 2007 policy supporting decrim of abortion. It's about doing the right thing, not kowtowing to moralistic ideology that puts the ideal of female sexual purity above the human rights and safety of women and other sex workers. Amnesty is courageous and inspiring in its recognition of the necessity of fighting for sex worker rights.
Murphy and other fundamentalist feminists are on the wrong side of history and are part of a dwindling and desperate minority. Has it ever occurred to you, Murphy, that if the World Health Organization, United Nations (including UNAIDS, UN Women, Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health, Human Rights Council), Global Alliance Against Trafficking in Women, Human Rights Watch, The Lancet, and others, SUPPORT sex worker rights and full decriminalization – and that if the overwhelmingly vast majority of working sex workers around the world, including the 237 sex worker organizations in 71 countries under the Global Network of Sex Work Projects, with some groups reaching 10s of 1000s of members in developing countries like India and Argentina – also DEMAND full decrim and support Amnesty's policy, that maybe, just maybe – YOU MIGHT BE WRONG?
When she says "The very idea of prostitution is one that says women are not fully human", I can’t help but wonder if SHE thinks sex workers are not fully human. When she says "they are things that men have the right to use and abuse," I can’t help but wonder if SHE believes that sex workers are things and that men are abusive and exploitive by nature. When she says "men's sexual pleasure is more important than women's humanity", I can’t help but wonder if SHE believes that women who sell sex lose their humanity (because women are defined by their sexuality?) When she says "a john … is, in fact, paying for the right not to respect her", I can’t help but wonder if SHE's the one who is unable to respect sex workers for selling sex.
When she said in another Rabble article that sex workers “deserve better and are more than a series of holes for you [johns] to penetrate on a whim,” I can’t help but wonder if she herself sees sex workers as a lower class of sub-humans who really ARE nothing more than a series of holes to penetrate – but who can better themselves if they would only leave sex work. Why else would Murphy feel free to talk about sex workers in degrading and dehumanizing language, even though she’s been told by sex workers how hateful and hurtful this feels to them? Of course, Murphy would deny all this and say the opposite is true, but have you ever heard of “projection”? Really, it’s a very fine line that I think she crosses regularly. After all, she seems to take delight in using such language, and there is often an undercurrent of contempt and disrespect for sex workers in her writings and online debates on sex work.
Like every other prohibitionist on the planet, Murphy has obviously not bothered to read or understand Amnesty's draft resolution. (http://tasmaniantimes.com/imag... It mentions women 16 times, for example. Amnesty consulted extensively with sex workers and sex-worker led groups – mostly women. Amnesty conducted years of research and found that criminalization in any form causes harm because it deprives sex workers of equal protection under the law. Its draft resolution is clear that trafficking and exploitation are illegal and must remain so, and that any criminalization of sex work, including the Swedish model, exacerbates stigma, marginalization, violence, exploitation, and trafficking. Frankly, I trust the evidence far more than baseless scare-mongering opinions like: “The industry requires exploitation and violence is inherent to the system of prostitution. The system is violent. It is exploitative. It is about male abuse of female bodies. Prostitution is harm.”
Murphy also has trouble with facts, claiming that “The term [sex worker] ensures men remain invisible and unaccountable in all of this, despite the fact that it is only men who drive the industry and only men who are responsible for the harm.” The sex industry is, IN FACT, driven by women, because they do most of the sex work and make most of the money. In a Canadian study, 81% of sex workers and 83% of clients surveyed agreed that the providers set the terms of the transactions. Of course, there’s plenty of men in the industry too, but large numbers of women work as third parties (many of them former sex workers), plenty of men and transgender people are sex workers, and couples and women are frequent customers of sex workers. Also, sex workers not infrequently rob or even assault their clients, so the “exploitation” can work both ways. Murphy’s hardline male/female binary model of prostitution exposes her almost total lack of knowledge about sex workers and the industry, which in turn raises serious questions about her credibility when making pronouncements about it.
(...)
Murphy and other fundamentalist feminists are on the wrong side of history and are part of a dwindling and desperate minority. Has it ever occurred to you, Murphy, that if the World Health Organization, United Nations (including UNAIDS, UN Women, Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health, Human Rights Council), Global Alliance Against Trafficking in Women, Human Rights Watch, The Lancet, and others, SUPPORT sex worker rights and full decriminalization – and that if the overwhelmingly vast majority of working sex workers around the world, including the 237 sex worker organizations in 71 countries under the Global Network of Sex Work Projects, with some groups reaching 10s of 1000s of members in developing countries like India and Argentina – also DEMAND full decrim and support Amnesty's policy, that maybe, just maybe – YOU MIGHT BE WRONG?