Stigma and the Consequences of Being the Wrong Kind of Woman

In the wake of the murder of a sex worker activist in Sweden, stripper Edie Lamort writes about the stigma faced by women who choose sex work.

Last week a Swedish sex worker named Petite Jasmine was allegedly murdered by her violent ex-husband. A victim of an unbalanced man but also of the draconian Swedish sex laws, the so-called Nordic Model, that so many of our politicians here seem to idolise. Mainstream media did not report this angle, as they too seem to be in favour of the Nordic Model. However last weeks events show the consequences of such laws that feed the terrible stigma around anyone involved in sex work. Despite being an articulate and obviously intelligent campaigner her job as a sex worker meant the courts saw her as an unfit mother so placed her children with their violent father. The man who then went on to kill her by stabbing her 27 times. She reported his violence to the police but was not believed due to her job. Here are some links:

http://titsandsass.com/the-bloody-state-gave-him-the-power-a-swedish-sex-workers-murder/

http://researchprojectkorea.wordpress.com/2013/07/16/rest-in-peace-jasmine/

https://jasmineanddora.wordpress.com

http://scarletalliance.org.au/issues/swedish_model/Swedish_briefing/

There are rallies this Friday in various cities throughout the world to show support for Jasmine and a murdered transgender sex worker called Dora, and to protest against criminalisation. The organisers of the event have said,

“We are calling all our friends and families to protest the Swedish model that took away the children of Jasmine and gave the custody to her violent ex-husband who finally murdered her. Social workers and the Swedish state refused to listen to Jasmine. Why listening to a sex worker who doesn’t know what is good for her? That criminal system cost Jasmine her life.”

https://www.facebook.com/events/552582234799603/?notif_t=plan_user_invited

This reminded me of a changing room conversation one day in an East End strip pub. A dancer had told me once that her goal was in order to ensure she could get the best IVF treatment. She’d been told several years previously by her doctor that she would struggle to conceive naturally so her savings plan had focused around ensuring she had a family. Her husband worked as a builder and she as a stripper. A stereotypical working class couple making good, working towards creating a nice family home in the suburbs. After many years of trying and buying the best IVF treatment they were unsuccessful and decided to adopt. They began the procedure but were eventually refused because of her job. As an erotic dancer she was viewed as an unfit mother despite them being a perfectly decent couple who’d worked hard for decent home. So a child was denied a good home due to social prejudice and a patronising narrative against ‘the fallen woman’. They had worked for years to achieve their goal but this stigma prevented them opening their home to a child in need.

Another example of the effects of stigma is the story of ‘Luanna’. She was a Brazilian dancer who worked for many years in London and also trained to be a pharmacist. She met and fell in love with a handsome Australian and eventually moved to the other side of the world to be with him. It all began well with her getting that pharmaceutical job, having a child and building a new life. Then the marriage broke down and a messy divorce ensued. Her husband then turned and showed his true colours and hypocrisy by using her former job against her as a way of gain full custody of their son. She was devastated.

Whilst living in London he had not once complained about her job as a dancer and was very happy to go to the fancy parties, the expensive restaurants, enjoy the 5 star holidays and get a nice new motor cycle. In fact he would tell her she was beautiful and it was a great job, he had no problems with her dancing. So she carried on under a false sense of security as he merrily spent her money. But hey, they were building a life together, or so she thought, there would be a point when he had to take care of her so it would all balance out surely?

Yet when they went to court, whether he believed in the authenticity of the argument or not, he knew he could throw the stigma of being an erotic dancer at her. This was to discredit her and humiliate her out of anger and spite but he was fully aware that he could use the uninformed prejudices in society to win his argument. He knew what buttons to push despite the fact that he had lived off of her earnings, had been quite happy with it at the time, and that she had achieved an education and career out of it. The court ruled in his favour.

Eventually after a long fight she managed to start seeing her son again at weekends and is slowly rebuilding their relationship. Yet in this act of vengeance, his and society’s punishment of the immoral woman, did he think of the consequences for the child? The fact that his son was denied a relationship with his own mother and that he caused his son distress? Or maybe that he may have been damaging his son’s future ability to relate to women due to the fact that his own mother had been denounced? Would the child grow up hating women because of this? The only thing that was considered was that at some point she had been the ‘wrong type of woman’.

All these attitudes and laws have their roots in centuries old church morality, which simply doesn’t work in the modern world. Yet these prejudices can be thrown at women at any time. Find yourself outside of the norm and wait for the onslaught. There has been a growing cacophony, a white noise of ignorance, over the past few years from journalists and lobbying groups who label themselves feminists to increase this stigma and further alienate anyone who works in the erotic industries. What they fail to realise is that this stigma is dangerous and damaging to all women. It narrows the confines of what a ‘good’ woman is and will have consequences on all women as it encourages slut-shaming. God help you if you fall outside the narrowing perimeters of what is ‘good’.

Those who work in the erotic industries are the outer limits, the final rings around planet ‘what is acceptable’. We are taking the flack and therefore those who exist further in can do as they please. As long as we remain the definition of slut the rest of you are relatively safe. However if we are driven underground and the world becomes a more judgemental and puritanical place then ‘normal’ women will also become targets. Holly Willoughby showing too much cleavage on The Voice to the closing of Burlesque venues. This is why I find Radical Feminism so bizarrely anti-women. They would like to close the walls around women and narrow the definition of what is acceptable for a woman to be. Not allowing space for individuality or creativity. Woman have spent decades fighting to have a wider range of choices yet one group feels it has the right to impose it’s way of life upon another. Stigma kills.

Peter LaBarbera Does NOT Suck Dick*

Sometimes, I realise that this whole moron-watching thing is a bit too easy. In order to easily shock/amuse people, I find myself cherry-picking the most ludicrous people in the world, and “exposing” them as idiots. Anyone can do this. It’s like shooting fish in a barrel. We, all of us, whatever our political or religious views, tend to present complex, nuanced situations and people as two-dimensional. From time to time I catch myself creating caricatures of people who, in reality, have both good and bad sides to their characters.

Many of us were guilty of this during the gay marriage debate in the UK. We tended to mock and vilify opponents of gay marriage, without hearing what they had to say. In the US, the arguments reach even more extreme and stereotyped positions. I’ve seen many passionate Christians abused and smeared, simply for standing up against – what they call – the Gay Agenda. Whatever we think of their views, we must surely recognise their principled bravery in making their stand. Perhaps we should try to hear what they are saying.

One such advocate is Peter LaBarbera, President of Americans For Truth. Peter worries that many Christians simply don’t think enough about homosexuality. Sure, it crosses their minds from time to time, and they don’t like the idea of it, but for well over 90% of their lives, they don’t even think about it at all. Yet – as LaBarbera knows – homosexuality is a grave sin in the eyes of Christianity. Most Christians would rather ignore what goes on in gay bedrooms; but LaBarbera ain’t most Christians.

I may oppose everything he stands for, but I can’t fault his bravery. Despite being obviously disgusted by gay sex – cock-sucking, anal, fisting, etc. – Peter LaBarbera thinks about it all the time. This March, he took his commitment to a whole new level: he went to The Castro, San Francisco’s gay district, and shot photos of semi-naked gay men. On Easter Sunday! When really, he should have been in church with his family, several thousand miles away!! And what do the advocates of the Gay Agenda do? They name him “Porno Pete”. How childish.

We may laugh, but why not accept that this man is clearly far more driven than most of us. If I spent as much time blogging as LaBarbera does thinking about gay sex, I’d probably need to upgrade to a bigger server.

Perhaps, Peter LaBarbera has actually tried sucking cock. Not because he wants to, but because he wants to get inside the mind of the enemy. How can you oppose the Gay Agenda unless you have lived it? There is – I must make clear – no evidence whatsoever that Peter LaBarbera sucks cock. I’m just saying that I wouldn’t be surprised if he had, for perfectly good reasons.

So people, before you mock, try to understand what makes these people tick. The Gay Agenda has made Peter LaBarbera – and doubtless many other good, heterosexual Christians – think about cocks, anuses and cocks being inserted into anuses, far more than is healthy. There is a divide between us and them; Peter LaBarbera is trying to reach around this divide. I, for one, applaud him.

* Probably

Maggie: A Nation Mourns

Britain ground to a halt today as crowds of ordinary people thronged the streets to say goodbye to a dear leader, Margaret Thatcher. Thatcher, who single-handedly killed Stalin as well as ending child poverty here at home, was probably the most loved Briton of the 20th century, even surpassing the popularity of Winston Churchill.

Alf Grimes, a former coal miner from South Yorkshire, couldn’t stop the tears from rolling down his grubby face. “It were ‘orrible in t’ pit”, he sobbed. “Only Maggie understood, and put an end to our suffering”.

A delegation of West Indians from South London also turned up and sang Negro spirituals as the procession passed. Winston Green, one of their number, reminisced: “I was only a teenager then”, he said, “and Maggie made sure we went home and did our homework, by sending in the police to swamp the streets at sunset. Yes, the truncheon blows hurt, and I still experience the occasional headache, but if it wasn’t for her, I wouldn’t be the CEO of a major international corporation now.” (At least I think that’s what he said – his accent was a bit strong).

But a picture tells a thousand words. Our correspondents in London and Leeds submitted the photos below which really capture the raw emotion of the day. Rarely has the British public experienced such unity. Maggie may be gone, but as these images show, she will never be forgotten.

London (photo courtesy @IveMetJoeBlack on Twitter)

London (photo courtesy @IveMetJoeBlack on Twitter)

IanWhiteNews

Leeds (photo courtesy @IanWhiteNews on Twitter)

Mali Update: Slaughter in Timbuktu

As I blogged earlier this week, Mali’s supposed “anti-jihad” efforts are looking remarkably like previous attempts at ethnic cleansing against “white” desert tribes by the black Malian majority. I am friends with a Malian Tuareg, M, who now has fled to Europe, but has family in Timbuktu.

Yesterday, the media reported that Malian forces had taken Timbuktu. Some reported of “reprisals against Islamist supporters”. The reality appears to be that racial minority businesses have been robbed and individuals lynched. A Facebook update from M received yesterday:

Hello

Yesterday the black population of Timbuktu blessing and encouraged by Malian army break Tuareg and Moorish houses, stores and take their contained.
Why the French army did not say anything?
Ago the arrival of the Malian Army in Timbuktu all the Tuaregs and Moors have left the city leaving behind their property.
At the same time the black population that does not participate in the hunt against the Tuaregs and Moors are therefore considered Islamist [and lynched]!! This is terrible!!

killed by population and malian army in public


what are happing now is the some as in 1991, 1992, 1994

It is sad and not human

As ever, the moron media has swallowed the “war on terror” justification for this military action. And as they did in Rwanda, France turns away as one African tribe slaughters another.

Oh, and did you notice that, having diversified from Middle Eastern sources, the US now gets 25% of its oil from West Africa?

Sex, Lies and Julian Assange (TV documentary)

Given the amount of noise around the Assange case for the past few days, it’s unsurprising that confusion reigns. The rape allegations against Assange, made two years ago, have suddenly resurfaced, and that debate has masked important global events: in particular, illegal and undemocratic behaviour by the UK government last week, in its unprecedented threats against the Ecuadorian embassy. The ex-Ambassador Craig Murray covers this in a recent post. Surely nobody, other than the most moronic, thinks the UK would threaten centuries of diplomatic precedent over a rape suspect; this is the kind of act that begins wars.

The behaviour of the Swedish authorities also has been bizarre in the extreme; it’s true that anyone accused of rape should face justice – what the mainstream reports, and much of the debate, have missed is that it’s Sweden, not Assange, that has obstructed justice for the women alleging rape. Senior Swedish ex-prosecutor Sven Erik Alhem has explained in a detailed statement how the prosecutors themselves have breached fundamental protocols for carrying out a valid prosecution which could lead to a fair trial.

Unfortunately, much of the online debate has lapsed into hysteria. Anyone questioning the bizarre behaviour of the Swedes has been attacked with this week’s Orwellian slur: “rape apologist”. So before this is repeated in the comments below let’s be clear: rape is a serious allegation. Alleged rapists should face trial. If anyone is a “rape apologist”, it’s those who turn a blind eye to Sweden’s abuse of due process in the case of rape allegations. The Swedish prosecutors have ensured that no fair trial can be possible – where are the howls of outrage about this?

A new Australian TV documentary breaks down the events of the past couple of years. It’s important viewing for anyone with an interest in this case. And everyone should have an interest – this story is about alleged crimes from rape to mass murder, the greatest attacks on Western free speech since the 1930s, and the full-scale subversion of Western democracies, including our own in Britain.

I posted the video yesterday, but YouTube removed it; here it is again. It’s worth 45 minutes of your time.
.

Disclose.tvSex, Lies and Julian Assange (Full Documentary 2012)

The UK #PornTrial (Audio)

Recently, the #PornTrial created a storm on Twitter and then in the British mainstream media. Simon Walsh was on trial under a draconian law that criminalises the possession of so-called “extreme porn”. This law outlaws images and videos of many sex acts, including many that are perfectly legal. I met Myles Jackman, Walsh’s solicitor, to discuss the trial and its implications.