How do you solve a problem like Ruhama ?

As hard as the recent battle in Scotland was against the anti's, it was manageable. Oh sure, we had the misrepresentation of statistics, the 'Nefarious' roadshow, the dogged determination of Abolition Scotland to convince us all of the existence of thousands of sex slaves in Scotland to name but a few, but we got there. Ireland on the other hand is a work of art when it comes to anti's antics, they are literally running amok.

At roughly the same time as the consultation on prostitution began, Ruhama wheeled out a 'survivor' of the 'horrors' of the sex trade, to speak in favour of the introduction of the Swedish model. Enter stage left - Rachel Moran. To my regular readers, Ruhama need no introduction, I've written about their background as the same nuns behind the Magdalene scandal, not to mention their extensive government funding here.

From the very beginning, I sat up when they introduced Moran. In many respects she's perfect to front their cause. She's young, she's very attractive but not quite well spoken enough as to arouse any disbelief. Her book, which I've read, is the classic tale of rising from the ashes of a car crash existence to putting herself through Uni to where she is today. All very admirable, but something was irking me and I needed to work out what that was.

Moran and I worked in Dublin at the same time, the early nineties. I worked in the same brothels, for the same escort agencies and had regular contact through the drop in clinic on Haddington road with the same women, she says she stood on street corners with. One of those women is now a prominent activist working alongside me and is prepared to swear an affidavit to the effect that she has never set eyes on Moran until her book launch. That's not to say that Moran is falsifying the fact that she worked on the street, but isn't it odd that they never met ?

The picture I've included for you above is of the first brothel I worked in, which sits just behind the main shopping thoroughfare of Grafton Street. It was run by Tom McDonnell, a notorious pimp who went on to serve time in Portlaoise prison and fell foul of the Criminal Assets Bureau. Now, you might think that my description of Tom as a notorious pimp means that I had a terrible time working there, not at all. Actually, Tom and I were rather begrudgingly fond of each other. In fact, when I wrote this piece on Back to brothels and spoke with fondness of the day I got sacked for the third time for laughing about his 'tubular drier', it was Tom I was talking about.

Each Christmas Tom threw a party, and we tried anything and everything to get out of it. It was referred to in our circles (affectionately) as 'The Hoor's Ball', and in spite of loud protestations, we were taken out for a full Christmas dinner with all the trimmings, followed by enough booze to float the Titanic. Writing this, I realise that I still miss the comeraderie of brothels. Yes, we bitched and we fought, but at the base of it there was an unbreakable bond between the women, it was us against the world. It was in Tom's that I learned of the 'tain't' (t'aint one or the other) - aka the perineum, that area of a man which is super sensitive and the best place to head if you want to end an appointment early because the take away has just arrived in the staff room. It was in Tom's where I held my head very low after I learned that a request for 'water sports' didn't in fact mean a day on a yacht and was more to do with a shower cubicle and lots of towels. Yes, the other women laughed, but it was good natured and the protective arm was always there, looking after me as a newbie.

As a sex worker in Ireland in the early nineties, I began to spread my wings, and 'touring' became the norm. I visited Limerick, Cork, Waterford, Kilkenny and Galway. At that time we all worked for the same lady, Marian, and although I can't say that she looked out for us as Tom did, she certainly never did us any wrong.

So I struggle, I really do, to see why Moran hasn't been more forthcoming in her 'memoirs'. I worked for them all. Tom, Marian, Karen, Alan and Raymond (the chuckle brothers), Melanie, Amanda. Those names will mean nothing to you, but to a sex worker who was in Dublin at that time, she should know exactly who I'm talking about. Why the secrecy ? Why the blanket claim that all of her experiences were so horrifying ? It simply doesn't add up. Moran says that in seven years of sex work she never met one client who showed her a shred of empathy or kindness. That's incredible. Because in all of my time there, I met some lovely guys. What, she never met the motorbike Garda we all christened 'Chips' ? He was a dude, and always gave us the heads up if there was going to a crackdown.

Turning to the language employed by Moran, it's here that I find the biggest discrepancies, it is literally like she is reading from a script. In a recent interview at a Waterford 'roadshow', she described some of the terminology used by the sex industry to 'sanitise' the whole transaction. Not a chance in hell are they her words, I'll wager anything on it. Similarly, the devil is in the detail and in her book, she repeatedly refers to 'domination'. The only issue I have with that is that back then, we never used that word, it was always 'discipline'. These might seem like minor discrepancies to you but to me it just added to the overall feeling of unease I had.

I was right. Having sat back and studied Moran for weeks, a very brave co-activist came forward and confirmed that Ruhama had approached her. She alleges (and I absolutely trust her word) that they offered her money to 'turn' and campaign for their side. In fact, they offered her a book deal and a tour too, exactly as Moran has now. She refused, because she has a conscience. So do I, and it is for this reason I can no longer stay quiet about the blatant lying that the anti's are doing. For people who purport to care about 'vulnerable women', it would seem that the truth can step aside to make room for continued funding.

It is an appalling situation and I will be doing everything in my power to access the working group which I understand is to convene following summer break. One final point. As I understand it, the anti's in Ireland have a habit (every pun intended) of collaberating with a Sunday newspaper which routinely outs sex workers and makes their lives unmanageable. I hold a letter from that newspaper, dating back to the early nineties, promising not to publish my details or make mention of my (and I quote) 'vice activities'. Pictorial evidence available. I wouldn't, if I were you.

LL xx

A letter to Alan Shatter (part two)

This morning I had a response from the Minister for Justice and Equality, Alan Shatter.

Dear Ms. Lee,

I refer to your recent email concerning the future direction of legislation on prostitution.

In June 2012, the Minister published a discussion document on the future direction of legislation on prostitution. The purpose of the discussion document is to facilitate a public consultation process. On its publication, the Minister referred the discussion document to the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Justice, Defence and Equality. The joint committee conducted its consultation process independently and published its report on 27 June.

The Minister has not yet had the opportunity to fully consider its contents.

The report of the Joint Committee and the views expressed at a conference on prostitution hosted by the Department last October will be fully considered in the framing of any necessary legislative proposals to be submitted to Government in due course.

Yours sincerely,



Chris Quattrociocchi

______________________

Private Secretary to the

Minister for Justice and Equality

I have just sent this email by way of response.

Dear Mr.Quattrociocchi,

Thank you for your email and I note what you say.

In considering fully the recommendations of the Joint Committee, it is worth noting that the voices of those who will be impaired by the legislation, sex workers, were for a large part of the consultation process, excluded.

I should be much obliged if you would ask Minister Shatter to have a brief meeting with me in Dublin.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

Laura Lee
International Union of Sex Workers

I will of course update as and when any further developments occur.

LL xx

A letter to Alan Shatter

from: Laura Lee
to: alan.shatter@oireachtas.ie
date: 30 July 2013 12:47
subject: Proposed changes to legislation on paid sex

Dear Mr. Shatter,

I am an independent Irish sex worker of some twenty years experience.

I began my career in Ireland and worked all over the country in hotels, flats and massage parlours. I worked in Dublin at the same time as Rachel Moran and can speak to the realities of the industry, both then and now.

The further criminalisation of the sex industry in Ireland is dangerous, I know first hand of the damage the 1993 Act did and I simply can't sit back and watch it happen all over again. I have long considered the implications of such a move on my part, when my own family have asked me to take a step back from Irish politics. I can't, it's too important.

I don't have an agenda, or a book to sell. I'm just passionate about the rights of sex workers and their continued welfare. I ask that we meet, at a time and place of your choosing. I am now Glasgow based and an hour's flight away. It has never been more important to consider the position of those who will be most influenced by any change to the law. I look forward to hearing from you.

Is mise le meas,

Laura Lee

It's time for ACTION.

In Scotland we celebrated, as we heard that at long last, Rhoda Grant's attempt to implement the Swedish model had fallen, having not received the cross party support required. Our joy was short lived however, when we learned of the death of Petite Jasmine, brutally murdered by her abusive partner having already lost her children to him. Jasmine was a passionate sex workers' rights activist and a staunch opponent of the Swedish model because she knew first hand the harm it could do.

On Friday, the Swedish Rose Alliance released this statement on Facebook: “Our board member, fierce activist, and friend Petite Jasmine got brutally murdered yesterday (11 July 2013). Several years ago she lost custody of her children as she was considered to be an unfit parent due to being a sex worker. The children were placed with their father regardless of him being abusive towards Jasmine. They told her she didn’t know what was good for her and that she was “romanticizing” prostitution, they said she lacked insight and didn’t realise sex work was a form of self-harm. He threatened and stalked her on numerous occasions. She was never offered any protection. She fought the system through four trials and had finally started seeing her children again. Yesterday the father of her children killed her. She always said, “Even if I can’t get my kids back I will make sure this never happens to any other sex worker.” We will continue her fight. Justice for Jasmine!”

I cried when I learned of Jasmine's death, for many reasons. I thought of how she must have felt in those last remaining terrifying moments of her life, I thought of the feeling of emptiness that she had without her children and I felt her immense frustration when she spoke of the State's failure to support her, all because she was a sex worker. I sobbed as I thought of my love for my daughter when I read this passage from Jasmine's blog -

"After one year and three months finally see her standing in front of me. The feeling when she runs into my arms and hug me, to get sniff her hair immediately becomes soaking wet of my tears, drag your finger along her small nose and chin, stroking her little hand and hold on her tiny body hard in my embrace and kiss her eleven thousand times in the forehead. To finally get to see her in the eye and say seventeen thousand times how missed and loved she is. And never want to let go again, but must. Created by my body when we two have been and we are part of each other forever. The love for my children is indescribable. (And justice system as said joint custody and half the time, where were you when everything was going on?)"

But right now as I write this, something wonderful is happening. Sex workers around the world are taking to the streets to protest. On Friday 19th July, sex workers from twenty three cities on three continents are going to march on the embassies of Sweden and Turkey, because we have also lost a Turkish sex worker, Dora Oezer. We are going to tell them that we have had enough of being treated as second class citizens and that we are tired of the stigma which KILLS.

Would you like to support us ? Here's what you can do. Check this website for details of your local protest and come and join us. Please remember to keep checking the site as the week progresses because more and more sex worker groups are coming on board all the time and new protests are being established.

If you have a Twitter account you can tweet a link to that site to raise awareness and support too, using the hashtags #JusticeForJasmine and #JusticeForDora. Also, on Friday 19th, we aim to get the hashtag #stigmakills trending. So please do what you can and let's get our voices heard. It has never been more important.

LL xx

Sex work and stigma

The Oxford English dictionary defines stigma as - 'a mark of disgrace associated with a particular circumstance, quality, or person'. Invariably, when it comes to sex work, stigma applies right across the board, regardless of what form of sex work you undertake. Similarly, stigma bears no relation to your background, ethnicity or chosen faith. It's a badge which is acquired the first time you accept payment for sex, whether you like it or not - and it's what stops so many sex workers 'coming out'.

Time and time again I get emails from sex workers thanking my colleagues and I for the campaigning work we do but saying - 'I'd love to help you but you know what it's like'. I certainly do, and I'm not suggesting for one moment that every sex worker should come 'out', not at all. It's a huge decision to make and can have ramifications you hadn't even thought of, for instance read this piece here by Maggie McNeill and also the comment from Dr. Brooke Magnanti.

This is a society, where, should I wish to, I can go out on a Friday night, get hopelessly drunk and jump into bed with Mr. A. Random. Because I'm non compos mentis then the chances are any form of protection will go out the window, as will any form of valid consent. As a society, we deem that okay, because everyone does it, right ? If I go to a hotel, meet Mr. A. Random in the middle of an afternoon, spend a couple of pleasant protected hours and get paid for it - pearls everywhere are clutched and horror levels soar. But in my second example, I'm safer. I know his name, his phone number, where he is staying and I am in a hotel surrounded by people. I'm in charge of what I'm doing and am completely free to say 'no'. Once money changes hands, what started as a mutually beneficial and pleasurable experience becomes demonized, because stigma enters the equation.

I have a theory and it is simply this - I don't believe that sex work itself is inherently harmful. What is more harmful is the scorn, social isolation and constant questioning of integrity poured upon those of us who choose to sell sex, by a society filled with hypocrisies. Keeping what you do for a living a secret, is very hard work and involves layers of deception and secrecy. For those who have been 'outed' against their will, it's even harder as large groups of people make huge assumptions about your identity and your standards and to have to defend yourself against those who rail against you on a continual basis is nothing short of exhausting.

If you're wondering what I mean by a 'society filled with hypocrisies' let's consider the 'Cougar'. Here is a woman who will proactively seek younger men to partner on an almost predatory basis and certainly because she can give him a better lifestyle in exchange for great sex. There's nothing wrong with that as far as I'm concerned but I do wonder why that exchange is free from stigma whilst the exchange of cash is not. A long time ago and in a brothel far away, one of my colleagues remarked - 'this is the most honest money you'll ever earn in your life', and I believe she's right. No strings, no bows, no promises of being elevated to a higher social echelon - I simply date for cash.

Although I am blessed to be surrounded by an amazing support system of friends and allies, I still experience stigma, albeit to a lesser degree. It's the beatific smile filled with pity, it's the group of women who fall silent as soon as I enter the room and it's the man who shook my hand in a green room and when he thought I wasn't looking, wiped his hand 'clean'. And that, my friends - is what needs to change.

The final countdown

Rhoda Grant wrote a final hour article for the NewStatesman in which she seeks to undermine our position as sex workers entitled to defend our industry with facts and common sense. The link to the article is here.

It's nine days until we discover whether Ms. Grant has secured the required cross party support to bring her bill forward, criminalizing the purchase of sex in Scotland. At the time of writing, that support isn't in evidence.

The article claims that none of our current laws 'protect those who are prostituted' - but rape is an offence, as is assault and many forms of harassment. Human trafficking is also already covered by statute, although I support the proposal to implement a new law re 'aggravated trafficking'. So the laws to protect us are already in place.

As sex workers on the front line, Ms. Grant has steadfastly ignored us from the outset. We have presented statistics, personal testimony and evidence from around the world as to the damage the Swedish model would do and we have simply been told either that we are not representative or that she is in possession of (seriously flawed) evidence to suggest otherwise.

There is a further suggestion that all reports indicate that abuse is rampant within the industry. I would like to see some evidence to support such a sweeping statement. How odd, that when I have twenty years experience right through the industry that I have never encountered 'rampant abuse'. Neither have my very many colleagues. Later on, Grant herself calls for evidence to 'demonstrate that they (clients) are reporting instances of trafficking in great numbers'.

In order for there to be evidence of trafficking in great numbers, there needs to be trafficking in great numbers. There isn't, it's really that simple. Not quite what Abolition Scotland would have you believe when they rolled out the 'Nefarious' roadshow, each screening of which I believe told attendees of greatly exaggerated trafficking figures and urged them to write in support of this bill.

New Zealand (we are told) exists in a very different context to us and their immigration polices help to ensure that people who enter the country are protected through a buddy scheme. I'm not quite sure what different 'context' New Zealand enjoys, but we have a buddy scheme in the UK too, designed specifically for sex workers to look out for each other. Here's a link to the site for reference.

Having regard to the suggestion that Grant's proposed legislation is not flying in the face of worldwide recommendations, I quote Wendy Lyon - "Rhoda Grant is quite wrong to suggest that UN groups have only come out against criminalisation of sex workers, not of their clients. A 2012 joint report by UNAIDS, UNDP and UNFPA very explicitly opposed the criminalisation of clients and endorsed the New Zealand/New South Wales decriminalisation approach. The UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Health, Anand Grover, has also stated that removing criminal penalties against clients makes it easier to promote responsible client sexual behaviour."

Finally, to allege that those of us who speak up for our industry do so just because we are 'pimps' is as nonsensical as it is uncalled for. Grant is only too aware that several of us openly advertise as independent escorts.

One commentator sums up the discourse around this proposed legislation beautifully -
"Sex workers know more about the industry than anyone else....Why can't you grasp that simple fact?"

LL

PRESS RELEASE: SCOT-PEP Responds to Rhoda Grant

30th May 2013

Today, Scottish charity SCOT-PEP criticised Ms Grant’s summary of responses for her dismissal of the voices of sex workers and other experts on the regulation of sex work in Scotland. Over 900 responses were submitted to the public consultation which closed in December 2012 and Ms Grant claims most were in support of her proposals. SCOT-PEP however maintain that she has ignored the overwhelming evidence from renowned academics, un-biased experts and international bodies warning of the dangers of her proposed legislative approach, as well as the lived experiences of sex workers themselves. Instead, she favours the unsubstantiated views of those who support her position, relying on a combination of selective quotes from research findings, ‘studies’ that have been widely criticised for breaching ethical codes and in many cases a complete misrepresentation of the available evidence.

SCOT-PEP noted with interest Rhoda Grant’s reliance on the supposed success of the ‘Swedish model’. This is despite the fact that the Swedish government itself acknowledges the failure of the law - albeit in the small print. In 2007, the Swedish national health board wrote, “we cannot give any unambiguous answer to [the question of whether prostitution has increased or decreased] … no causal connections can be proven between legislation and changes in prostitution”. Expert on trafficking and labour exploitation Ann Jordan has repeatedly noted that there is “no evidence” that the Swedish law has decreased trafficking, and furthermore, in 2005 Swedish police complained of a decrease in information about trafficking, leading to zero convictions. Self-evidently, the police having no information and thus being unable to secure convictions against traffickers is hardly a victory against exploitation.

Even on its own terms, then, the Swedish model has failed: it has not reduced the amount of sex work, nor has it tackled trafficking. It has ushered in numerous harms for those working in the Swedish sex industry, with the most vulnerable workers the most badly affected. Sex workers report increased fear of violence, and increased stigma against them - which the Swedish government characterised as “positive”.

A SCOT-PEP Board member went into more detail on the damage of the Swedish model: “Legislation that criminalises the purchase of sex results in harmful outcomes for sex workers, including increasing their HIV risk, vulnerability to abuse and exploitation and limiting their access to effective healthcare and support services. This has been well documented around the world”, adding, “... with the alternative approach of decriminalisation being recommended by UNAIDS, UNFPA, UNDP, the Global Commission on HIV and the Law and most recently the World Health Organization. We fail to see why Rhoda Grant thinks she is better placed to decide the best model of legislation than global experts”.

Sex workers who are part of the SCOT-PEP network have come out in force against the lack of inclusion of their voices and recommendations in Rhoda’s summary.

An anonymous female sex worker said, “Ms Grant may be good at saving puddings but she sure doesn't show the same level of understanding and support when it comes to saving women. Where was she with her help 10 years ago when I had nowhere to spend the night and no money to buy food? Now, when through sex work I have a home, a comfortable life and, above all, a job that gives me purpose in life and pride in my own achievements, she suddenly wants to take it all away from me. How is this helping me? If she really wanted to protect women, she'd be dealing with what makes women enter prostitution in the first place: poverty, cuts and poor child support. With the law she's proposing she simply creates more poverty, misery and inequality."

Another anonymous female sex worker also noted that Rhoda Grant, despite her ‘feminist’ credentials, apparently has no care for women who are currently working. “I feel extremely let down. Has she forgotten that she entered politics to represent the people and not just to pursue her own agenda? I wonder if Ms Grant has any suggestions as to how I should support my family if she succeeds in effectively taking away my livelihood.”

Lily, a sex worker, said: "If Rhoda would open her closed mind and listen to the voices of sex workers she would hear stories of resilience, strength and pride, all of which she sidelines in her portrayal of us as victims in need of rescue and rehabilitation. We deserve the right to work and live free from violence, discrimination and labour exploitation, all of which will flourish under the legal system Rhoda is proposing.”

Laura Lee, a sex worker, expressed dismay at Rhoda Grant’s cavalier disregard of solid evidence. “I am appalled that Rhoda Grant has chosen to ignore the evidence as presented to her on numerous occasions as to the harm that this proposal will do to the very women she is purporting to protect.”

Sia, a sex worker, highlighted that Rhoda Grant’s understanding of the sex industry shows women less respect than the clients she imagines as universally abusive. “The definition of commercial sex work as a form of violence against women is extremely offensive to both us women who have made autonomous decisions to engage in commercial sex work as well as to the clients who treat us with respect and dignity. Something Rhoda Grant seems incapable of affording to adult women.”

Luca, a male sex worker, noted how dangerous Rhoda’s proposals are. "Many reports from Sweden and internationally show that the criminalisation of clients is not only ineffective but dangerous. To ensure sex worker's access to rights, health and justice, the right legal framework is decriminalisation".

Veronica, a sauna-based sex worker, said, “Rhoda Grant seems to think that any sex worker who disagrees with her is by definition ‘not representative’. This is a handy device for pre-emptively ignoring the many voices of those working who think her understanding of the sex industry is both flawed and dangerous. The women I work with in the saunas aren’t fancy, we don’t have lovely Holyrood careers. We just want the legal protections that come from recognising our work as work. If she had listened to any of us she would know that.”

SCOT-PEP particularly deplores that the serious and nuanced debate around tackling exploitation has been reduced in Rhoda Grant’s proposal to such a simplistic and poorly evidenced series of catch-phrases. The voices of sex workers - who are the people who know best how to tackle exploitation within the sex industry - are backed up by a huge body of international evidence which has shown repeatedly that, in the words of the most recent World Health Organization guidelines (December 2012), “countries should work toward decriminalisation of sex work”.

CONTACT DETAILS

Telephone: (+44) 0131 622 7550

Email: voice@scot-pep.org.uk