Scarlet Alliance – the tide has turned
By (*trigger warning*) Simone Watson and (*trigger warning*) references to the Nordic Model
Crikey! The pro-sex trade lobby have been misrepresenting (*trigger warning*) Nordic Model supporters with a renewed vigour.
The “Why be poor?” brigade of alleged “sex workers” certainly know how to spin a yarn but it’s the same old yarn and the public are just not swallowing it. EG.https://twitter.com/vixencollective
After I had a remarkable opportunity to (*Trigger Warning*) speak at Parliament House in Hobart on April 1st at a public forum with (*trigger warning*) Isla MacGregor, Jade Barker of the Scarlet Alliance who attended the forum, wrote a piece for The Mercury
Following this on Tasmanian Times “anonymous”, in a weak attempt, failed to discredit both me and (*TW*) NorMAC as though we really just don’t understand the issues and can’t smell a fraud from a mile off.
It is true it was only after Isla MacGregor and I (*TW*) spoke at the forum, that we were advised that Amy Barrett, the National Organising Manager for Amnesty International, https://au.linkedin.com/in/amy-barrett-88b22b78) had been present at the forum. It was, on reflection, interesting to observe Amy Barrett and Jade Barker chumming it up after the forum. I admit I was (*TW*) curious as to why this woman had her mouth set in such a way author Patrick White once described as “twenty past seven” when she looked at me. But of course (*TW*) Isla had just spoken about the insidious infiltration of Amnesty International by renowned pimp Douglas Fox and dodgy drug-cartel “philanthropist” George Soros amongst others.
Quite a few other names of people (*TW*) identifying as “sex workers” were also outed some of whom have been convicted of sex trafficking and other offences relating to brutal abuse of prostituted people.
I attempted to speak with Amy Barrett after the forum and much to my surprise was received with a very hostile and diffident expression. Surely she (*TW*) cares about women I wondered? Maybe her coldness was indicative of the grim fear that there would be consequences for her from the public outing Amnesty International had received from Isla over their very unethical conduct in development of their ‘sex work’ policy? Surely Amnesty now realised they had stuffed up big time, and are now on the receiving end of a backlash from global human rights groups that they could not have predicted the extent of when undertaking their mock consultation with selected stakeholders?
The Sex trade apologists’ “My Body, My Rights” propaganda ( a tag shamelessly hi-jacked from (*TW*) second wave women liberationists‘ “My Body, My Choice” campaign) has more to do with no choice but Amnesty persisted with its policy direction all the while ignoring the voices of Survivors who were telling them that it is men who commit violence against women in the sextrade – not laws. But let’s not mention the ‘M’ word eh!
Perhaps Amnesty’s National Organising Manager does not care about my voice and experience as a (*TW*) survivor? Once again the double standards operating here are appalling as if I were speaking out as a refugee, or a refugee survivor of sexual abuse in detention, or a survivor of domestic violence it would likely be very different. Presumably, if I was, one would hope Amy Barrett’s door would be open to me at all times. And no doubt a Media Release about my revelations would be pumped out quicker than the (*TW*) bat of an eyelid. (wasn’t sure if that was triggering or not but just to be sure.)
Barker’s piece in The Mercury trots out the usual myths ascribed to pro-Nordic model supporters, although calling some of us (*TW*)‘feminist’ was at least one accurate assertion in the article. But sadly, we read from Barker the same old knee jerk reaction of discrediting us for exposing the lies of the sextrade. The ‘wrong’ sort of feminists!
“Anonymous” in Tasmanian Times wildly exaggerates too but goes on to say she “genuinely feels sorry” for me. This lofty condescension indicates little commitment to actually doing something for the vast majority of women who are unable to access exiting services. Perhaps a re-examination of the (*TW*) abject failure of full decriminalisation in New Zealand is in order. With the more than doubling of prostitution happening within the first year that the decriminalised model was implemented, the 400% increase in street prostitution and the explosion in child ‘prostitution’ of mainly Maori and Pacific Islander girls, and first hand accounts of currently prostituted women who have been in the sex-trade since before the decriminalised model was implemented saying it has become worse – this is the model upheld by the sextrade lobby at a time when Germany is fast becoming a (*TW*) huge embarrassment to their floundering cause http://business.time.com/2013/06/18/germany-has-become-the-cut-rate-prostitution-capital-of-the-world/ .
It is obvious the pro-sex trade lobby are trying to avoid their previous endorsement of Germany, and will be further embarrassed by the results in New Zealand too- but apparently not yet. One last try perhaps?
Shouldn’t the focus be on (*TW*) the majority in the sextrade who are on the receiving end of male violence rather than feeling sorry for people like me and yourself – I mean at least we have a voice.
Apparently it is elitist for some to inform others that the majority of the prostituted are impoverished? Did Ken Roth of Human Rights Watch himself not just say, in his support of decriminalising johns and pimps, that poor women should have a right to earn a living ?
And haven’t Amnesty International and the Scarlet Alliance et al ?
Is “anonymous” implying that girls and women have the same access to education as boys and men globally? That it is OK for girls in Thailand to be sold off to city brothels to send money home to their families to pay for their brothers’ education? How opportunist is it that in response to the exorbitant cost of education here in Australia the Scarlet Alliance go on recruitment campaigns widely disseminating their propaganda at Open Days in universities? Should all Australians not be (TW*) demanding support for liveable incomes so they do not become objects for sexual exploitation in order to get an education whether they are domestic or international students?
The argument that somehow (*TW*) Nordic Model supporters and survivors ‘victimise “sex workers” by ‘calling us victims’ is an inverted version of the school-yard shame of not having the ‘right’ shoes. Anyone remember that (*TW*) some people cannot afford things and get teased because of it?
What we are supposed to do is (*TW*) tell the bullies to stop and when we (*TW*) grow up make sure that people have (*TW*) shoes, (or don’t wear shoes if they don’t wish)- not behave like over indulged infants! After all (TRIPLE *TW*) it’s not all about you – except when you are a sextrade apologist!
Wouldn’t it be terrific if stigma really was removed from those being bought for sex?
It would make it easier for people to (*TW*) expose the lies, put the (*TW*) perpetrators through the justice system and ensure proper witness (*TW*) protection for victims.
The cynicism expressed by Ken Roth and Amnesty International is staggering. Is this the aim for human rights? Blow jobs for men are a poor woman’s human right to earn a living? The Scarlet Alliance use the likes of Ken Roth and Amnesty to trumpet their cause.
The tide of public opinion is turning and the Scarlet Alliance like other sextrade front groups are going into damage control in reaction to the latest developments in (*TW*) France. No doubt there will be a new wave of pro ‘sex work’ documentaries saturating late night television funded by those who will lose the most from Nordic model laws being implemented – the traffickers, the pimps and the buyers.
In any case here is the alleged (*TW*)‘NorMAC Nastiness’ :
and a copy of (*TW*) Isla MacGregor’s speech here:
If (*TW*) men taking advantage of (*TW*)female poverty is considered a human right then I can’t imagine what further purpose the Scarlet Alliance or Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch serve than that of capitalist male hegemony.
And if that is (*TW*)‘nasty’ of me to point out, perhaps it is time they were as embarrassed to mention such groups to prove their ‘case’ as I am to ever have supported any of them.
(*TW*) edited version of this article
(*TW*) below :