The worst sin towards our fellow creatures is not to hate them, but to be indifferent to them; that’s the essence of inhumanity. – George Bernard Shaw
In my column of February 6th I discussed the tendency for prohibitionists to paint prostitutes as somehow less than fully human; the Victorians considered us atavisms, cops (including female cops) try to depict us as predatory criminals, and neofeminists portray us as “prostituted women”, in other words passive, stunted children without the ability to make adult decisions. It is to fight this perception that I so often stress the lack of important differences between harlots and other women; politicians and neofeminists both wish to distract amateurs from recognizing that the war on whores affects all women, not just professionals, because the day they recognize that fact is the day that prohibitionist laws become the subject of the same sort of massed feminine fury which is routinely directed against attempts to restrict abortion rights.
One particularly concrete example of the effect of whore-persecution on amateurs came to my attention last Thursday (March 10th); according to this report paraphrased from BBC News, a woman died after being stabbed by her boyfriend because two cops who were nearby thought it more important to continue with a plot to entrap streetwalkers than to try to save a woman’s life:
Two Northamptonshire police officers who said they were too busy working on “an anti-prostitution operation” to respond to an emergency call in which a woman was stabbed to death have received “written warnings” for their behavior. Police received a call at 0011 GMT on January 18th, 2010 from the home of Louise Webster, 40; the dispatcher could hear screaming and shouting and two minutes later confirmed that someone had been stabbed. At 0012 GMT and 0015 GMT a GPS device in one of the officer’s radios placed them in the immediate vicinity of the incident, so the control room requested them to respond because they were closest. But since they refused to do so, another officer patrolling alone somewhat farther away responded and arrived at about 0029 GMT; only then could the paramedic, who had to wait near the scene for police to arrive, enter the house to treat Webster, by which time it was too late to save her.
The murderer, Martin Ashby, was sentenced to life in prison last week, but the cops only received “warnings” because a police complaints commission claimed that even if they had responded it was too late to save Webster anyway. One commissioner dissented, saying “The police work to protect the public and preserve life. I find it deeply disturbing that these two officers who were in the immediate vicinity, chose to ignore these basic but fundamental principles.”
Even if the commission’s predictable findings were correct, the cops couldn’t have known it at the time; the fact of the matter is that these cowards preferred to bully one group of women rather than go to another’s rescue.
Whore stigmatization even affects women who left the profession years before; just ask Melissa Petro (who has now given up her fight to remain a teacher) or Tera Myers, a teacher who made a few porn films in the mid-‘90s under the stage name Rikki Andersin. Myers resigned from her position last week after a student recognized her in an old film (which he shouldn’t have been watching in the first place) and ratted her out to the school district. The following is paraphrased from a March 7th report by KFVS-TV:
Tera Myers, a high-school science teacher in Chesterfield, Missouri, has resigned after a student asked her about her past, referring to the one or more pornographic movies she made in the mid-1990s. A statement from the school district says she requested to be placed on administrative leave “out of respect for her privacy and that of her family,” and that she will be paid for the remainder of the term but will not return in the autumn. This isn’t the first time it’s happened to her; in 2006 her past was revealed while she was teaching in Paducah, Kentucky and her contract was not renewed because the superintendent “feared her presence would cause a distraction in the classroom.” Since acting in porn is not illegal, the information was not revealed on background checks performed by either school district.
Like Melissa Petro, Myers’ career in harlotry was short-lived and she was praised as an exceptional teacher, but obviously we can’t have those sex rays contaminating the innocent little darlings, especially not the ones who are already watching porn and developing future careers as stool pigeons.
Of course, this isn’t really surprising; unjust and abominable treatment of whores and former whores is widely accepted in North America. The US government mouths platitudes in response to UN reports condemning its human rights violations (“We agree that no one should face violence or discrimination…based on…their status as a person in prostitution…”) while not only condoning but actively encouraging the persecution of voluntary adult prostitutes, even in foreign countries where it isn’t criminal. And the Canadian government has argued that the prohibitionist laws struck down by the Ontario Superior Court in September should be reinstated because the government has no obligation to protect Canadian citizens who choose jobs known to be dangerous (such as cops?), and indeed has the right to artificially make such jobs more dangerous in order to discourage people from choosing them. But though news stories and Canadian government statements about mistreatment of or even violence against sex workers often contain a subtext that prostitutes choose and deserve to be harmed, violated or murdered, there are a few exceptions such as this one which appeared last Wednesday (March 9th) on the website of the Fox affiliate in Memphis, Tennessee:
Four prostitutes were killed and another…was shot several times and left for dead. All of these cases happened within weeks of each other…other than having prostitution in common and being found in the same central location, investigators still are not sure why these victims were chosen…”Prostitutes, young women’s bodies have been dumped here and that’s just sad,” said John Gray, who has relatives buried in the cemetery [where the bodies were found]…”It’s a scary thought that someone would kill people on a consistent basis and bring them to the same spot and dump their bodies. I would think it’s the same person…Right now, they’re saying it’s prostitutes being killed but when a person starts killing like that, you have to start getting worried about anybody.”
Unlike the Long Island district attorney, the officials in Memphis don’t appear to be minimizing the case simply because the victims were hookers; perhaps that’s just the way the article’s author, Lynn Lampkin, chose to write it, but the way the victims’ profession is treated as nonchalantly as if it were “cab drivers” or “waitresses” says otherwise and though the interviewee states the point clumsily, he also seems to recognize that a man who would kill prostitutes could just as easily kill any other woman. I honestly feel that most normal people are beginning to see us as women like any others, but unfortunately most of the cases of arrested development who see us as subhuman are concentrated in places where they can prevent the general awakening from having any practical effects in the here and now.
It is why it is so important we get our voices out there and challenge the neofeminists, the faux rescue industry and show the world our humanity, our intelligence and our need for human rights. We are none of the stereotypes that are so often used against us but the neofems and their conservative and faux rescue industry allies along with the police make their careers from our exploitation. They need us to be oppressed to keep their job and political power.
Thank you Maggie for this awesome post!
You’re welcome, Jill! It appears that SWOP is a lot more optimistic than I am about that State Department response I mentioned above; a few minutes ago Stacy Swimme posted on Bound, Not Gagged that there will be a number of demonstrations this Friday to celebrate it.
We need to drop the idea of “collateral damage” in civilian life. A good first step would be to stop referring to law enforcement as warfare (war on drugs, etc.). The proper job of the police is not to war on criminals but to protect the public. Catching crooks is part of how that’s done, but it isn’t the supreme goal in and of itself. Any time it comes down to a choice between protecting a person from immediate physical harm or catching a criminal (especially a non-violent ‘criminal’ like a prostitute or a pot smoker), the criminal should get away and the citizen should be helped.
Any cop who thinks he’s in that job to “punish criminals” needs to resign. Punishment is supposed to be decided by courts. If he wants to live out his Punisher fantasies, let him become an actor.
Another problem is that cops believe they’re a military organization, with military-style ranks and tactics and even referring to non-cops as “civilians” even though they (the cops) are civilians as well. Cops answer to the CIVIL authorities, do not have anything like boot camp or military order or discipline and are not subject to anything like the UCMJ.
You are so correct here Maggie and on the COPS THINKING they are a “Military Organzation”, If this blog were about Police burtality and the cops trying to be MILITARY, I could send you case after case. I post on all the things concerning Police Burtality THE BOARDS that is and a COP posted back to me on a case in Houston recently, “We are trained as the military, we are trained in combat”…BS!!! Their job is to subdue and arrest, they are not Judge and Jury. I told the cop that these abusers of the public should then go to the front lines in Iraq. No one wanted to..LOL! They are cowards hiding behind a badge and a gun. Check YOUTUBE for Police Burtality…Hard to believe, but true.
I know that I got off track here.
Joyce
Cop notions about their being military is a real bug in the bonnet for a number of military men I know.
In the link you have to “State has no obligation to protect prostitutes, Ottawa to argue at appeal”, it states:
“The law does not oblige individuals to engage in an activity that could risk their security,” it states. “It is the practice of prostitution in any venue, exaggerated by efforts to avoid the law, that is the source of the risk to prostitutes.”
I wish people would actually think for themselves once in a while. “Efforts to avoid the law is the source of risk”. Why are they avoiding the law and therefore putting themselves at risk? If they didn’t have to avoid the law, maybe it would be safer huh? You think?
Maybe on all calls, the police should first ask what a persons occupation is before deciding if they should be protected.
“911.
OMG Help I have a robber in my house with a knife!!
Yes, ma’am. What is your occupation?
Excuse me?
We have to determine if you are worth protecting.”
Give me a break…
And then the person on the other end of the phone could tell 911, “I’m a firefighter.”
That’s a dangerous job. Maybe they shouldn’t protect that firefighter? And if they should, then they’ve just thrown out their entire argument.
If the argument is that the police are under no obligation to help those who have broken the law, then they need to run every 911 call through the system to make sure the person seeking help hasn’t got any prior convictions, pending court cases, bounced checks, unpaid parking tickets…
Or maybe they should throw out such BS before it gets to that point. Yeah, I like that idea best.
Me, too. 🙂
I was wondering if this law applies to the U.S? If so is it in all states?. It is as though Prostitutes have no legal rights to protection as other human beings. Yes they think we are sub-human I have had to accept that from day one in the business. It is bad enough that society is of this mind set, but to actually pass LAWS????
I just work privately now and not as much in the loop.
I appreciate any help on anything new. I try to stay up to date on things, through sites like this, but I also stay really busy.
JOYCE
If you’re referring to the argument that prostitutes have no legal right to protection, that’s one made by the Canadian government in its attempt to reinstate a group of tyrannical laws (prohibitions against “living off the avails”, “brothelkeeping” and “communicating for the purpose of prostitution”) which were struck down by the Ontario Supreme Court last autumn.
Since prostitution is legalized in Canada, this provides yet another example of why we want decriminalization rather than legalization. Imagine if stripping were similarly controlled here in the US; it would mean one could openly be a stripper, but owning a strip club would be illegal and so would doing it in your own house. It would also be illegal for strippers to warn each other of dangerous men or to advertise that one was indeed a stripper, and one couldn’t legally hire a bouncer, be married or have roommates or dependent kids above 18. 🙁
LOL@Brandy’s 911 comment!
Maggie, you always seem to strike the core of my thoughts, and feelings, but this one really speaks to multitudes of women.
A story I know is fact….
In the Post Nicole Brown Simpson days, what type of government chooses multi arrested wife abusers, then when the woman escapes the economic control of that abuser, freeing herself with prostitution, (that he put her into anyway after losing his job) ..awards custody of the children to the abuser over the prostitute, days after he is released from jail? All he had to say was, I beat her because she’s a hooker!
The rest of the proceedings consisted of “HOOKER! HOOKER! HOOKER!” case closed.
And then allows the abuser control over the the prostitutes visitation, and contact with the children?
Wow…that must be one awful prostitute. ( considering his charges included false imprisonment, attempted murder, aggravated battery, and aggravated assault ) She’s one of the best parents I know…..Hasn’t seen her kids more than an hour a week in six months.
But can’t afford the legal costs to fight it, but she’s working on it.
A stripper, or porn star would have never suffered the same.
I hope you all received my email about the ripple effect, change has to begin with each of us. I am feeling a stronger and stronger urge to organize.
Speak Maggie. Write. Inform the uninformed, we are all suffering, and as we suffer, we heal others, providing love and support to men who suffer different issues. How ironic.
So many men that rely on us, who do we rely on?
We love you Kelly and yes I got your ripple effect email and I’m a gonna post it on my sites because like you, I think it’s a great message.
I’m saddened by that story, but not surprised; after all, we live in a country where people freak out if their kids see a nipple on TV but don’t care if they watch scenes of the most horrific violence. Our culture’s view of sex is so warped that there is a widespread belief that for a child to be touched sexually without force is more damaging to his psyche than being repeatedly beaten, and any psychologist who says otherwise risks public censure. 🙁
After Janet Jackson’s infamous wardrobe malfunction, so many people were screaming, “but, but there are CHILDREN who watch the Super Bowl!!!” One father mentioned that his son didn’t say a word about the pierced nipple (I’m guessing the child blinked, which is all it would’ve taken to miss it), but that the father did find it a bit embarrassing when, during a commercial break, his son turned to him and asked, “Daddy, what does ‘erectile dysfunction’ mean?”
Nobody seems to be onto Pfizer or Elli Lilly for corrupting the innocent. Maybe a penis that doesn’t work is considered safe for children? Or maybe it’s just that the words “erectile dysfunction” won’t produce an erection, and a bare tit might? Or even that, as rich as pop stars get, pharmaceutical companies are much, much richer?
Let’s also not forget that it’s OK to constantly talk on TV about the “wardrobe malfunction”, which would’ve been forgotten in two minutes had it not been reiterated for weeks. And it’s OK to purposefully subject children to endless parental or official questioning about incidents of being “touched” they may not even remember, thus associating the innocuous event with horrifying subjection to cross-examination and inducing feelings of guilt and shame which weren’t there before. And it’s even OK to bring up things like the Paul Reubens incident which young children couldn’t even have known about (because they don’t watch the news) in order to subject them to distorted “explanations” where none were necessary. Finally, it’s OK for certain strangers to feel little children’s genitals in public places, as long as those individuals wear government uniforms; a whole generation of kids is essentially being taught that cops have a right to assault or rape people. 🙁
It doesn’t even need to be a ‘malfunction’. Remember the Katy Perry Sesame Street fiasco?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YHROHJlU_Ng
I wonder if the parents who objected to the portion of breast/cleavage displayed refused to breastfeed …
There is a hilarious scene in episode nine of the US Skins. A teacher is accused of having sex with one of her students. The student, Chris (who is seventeen) is at the police station. The detective hands him a baby doll in a dress and tells him, “Show me where she touched you.” Chris nervously checks under the dress, notes the smooth crotch, and asks the cop how he’s supposed to comply.
Just found your blog and am enjoying it greatly.
Thank you, Bruce! 🙂