Cath Elliott has another piece up on the IUSW here.
I’ve just had word that Sunday’s fringe meeting on sex workers at the GMB Congress has today been cancelled following an intervention by the IUSW’s Catherine Stephens.
Apparently Stephens wasn’t happy that a representative from the Poppy Project had been invited to speak, so she managed to convince the GMB’s equalities peeps that Poppy were an anti-union organisation who shouldn’t be given a platform at a trade union conference.
Sorry, if you could just excuse me for a minute…..
The IUSW trying to dictate to others what trade unionism is all about?
Douglas Fox, pimp and professional windbag for the IUSW is at it again, although this time on a rather obscure pro-porny blog, rather than CiF.
As Cath points out, and it’s important to keep on pointing out, the IUSW is not a legitimate union; it is a lobby group for the sex industry. There is a real and significant difference between front-line workers and middle management (who both have the same employers) being allowed to join the same union, and workers and bosses and members of the public with vested interests being allowed to join the same ‘union’.
What’s interesting to note, from one of Cath’s comments, is how discussion of IUSW membership/campaigning seems to be part of the ‘services’ being purchased by some johns now, as a precursor to the real ‘business’. I guess this particular speciality won’t be listed on the ‘menu’ any time soon, as it might shatter the johns’ illusions.
Also good to note that Douglas is no longer referring to himself as an ‘Amnesty activist’ (although he’s still calling himself a ‘human rights activist’). He was only ever a member of Amnesty International, he paid his three quid a month like thousands of other people in the UK, he was not employed by Amnesty, he did not speak on behalf of Amnesty, and Amnesty did not indorse his opinions in any way. It was thoroughly dishonest the way he was trying to cash in on their good name and reputation.
Douglas Fox, pimp and IUSW spokesman, has been participating in an F-Word thread on prostitution exit programmes. As well as mentioning the stuff we ALL want, like decriminalising the prostitutes, providing decent drug addiction programmes etc, he said this in regards to women trafficked into prostitution:
And controversially I would argue that allowing them access to people who are also sex workers and so understand the work they have unwillingly or through survival strategies been involved. fellow sex workers can speak to them as people who understand what they have been doing in a non patronising or condescending manner manner [sic] would be helpful.
First of all, the IUSW claims trafficking is a myth, it’s all ‘migration for labour’, even if the woman is held in dept-bondage and forced to service ten men a day; so why would he be concerned with services for trafficked women if trafficking is a myth?
Putting that aside, how, exactly, would a women who has been trafficked into prostitution – who has been repeatedly beaten and gang-raped, who may have seen other trafficked women murdered, who is very likely suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder, and may have no home to return to because of the stigma attached to prostitution in her home country, or because it was her family who sold her into prostitution in the first place – benefit from having a conversation with a sex worker who can charge £100 an hour, pick and choose her clients and ‘loves her job’?
Since the IUSW have claimed that ‘children who have been sexually exploited sometimes have been so abused that they only feel safe working in the sex industry’ (Summit on Prostitution held by the Conservative Women’s Organisation) – remember, most of the victims of trafficking with be under-age girls – perhaps he is only being practical; they’re too damaged for anything else so they may as well get the best models for their inevitable role in the sex industry.
Or could it be that he’s let something slip? Is he actually admitting that prostitution is shitty, regardless of how much ‘choice’ is involved, and that even the experience of a ‘high-class escort’ will have something in common with that of a trafficked woman or girl?
It is good in a way – the more outrageous shit like this the IUSW comes out with, the more likely it is that the general public will begin to see that they are not benign. As another commenter on that thread, ‘v’, put it:
perhaps the next step for d fox is figuring out how to use rape crisis centres as recruitment agencies.