Tag: sex work is work

patchworkheart:

alucards-fine-ass:

auntiewanda:

respectthefemalebody:

Feminism is about burning down the PornHub and Kink.com headquarters.

Just say it’s your kink and watch the libfems ideologically malfunction. 

are we not going to talk about how PornHub offers comprehensive sexual education to those who are deprived in schools?

imagine hating that people masturbate so much 

XD

Also, PornHub funds scholarships for women in STEM fields and has their own snow plow service because they saw the Gov’t sucks at their job

Like

Imagine hating sex workers so much you want to destroy a company that employs sex workers and uses profits to better the lives of the people

Thank-you for supporting our industry!
😊 Speaking as a self-described extreme BDSM breath play specialist, I’m freelance, but a lot of my colleagues were made redundant when Screwdriver Smith was imprisoned for a string of killings. He managed several assassins! 😢 (What was he supposed to do instead of profiting from murder anyway? Go back into financial services?)

Our clients are perfectly lovely, normal people! The reason they hire us is that they don’t want to commit murder themselves, so they outsource it to us. They’re not violent psychopaths (an ableist slur, bt-dubs) just because they want to pay for violence, and sometimes want to watch it by demanding evidence of the hit. Plus, they better the lives of so many by donating the odd few quid to charities, and keeping the streets safe from rival gangsters on their turf.

Besides, it’s not like it’s real violence anyway. We’re selling a fantasy! (Well, I mean, the target is definitely dead, but the fantasy is that I didn’t do it.) And then I sell that fantasy to the police and any potential witnesses. (Anyway, lots of people enjoy target shooting, and it’s impossible to do that without using a person as the target – imagine hating everybody who likes sports! -_-;;)

Admittedly, I might not exactly represent everyone in my industry (e.g. all the child soldiers and conscripts you hear about now and again who might not want to commit murders), but imagine hating them so much that you would stop their employment! And if they don’t agree, they should get a blog and a marketing department of their own to put their side of the story.

Thank-you for being such a great ally to us! ^_^ I’d like to offer you a 10% discount on a future hit, so that’s £9,000 in used notes or into my Swiss bank account. Just let me know the target’s name and last known address, and provide a photo if possible (of the target, not of yourself please – after an unfortunate mix-up recently, I’ve had to start making that clear! ^_- )

femsev:

Sex trafficking laws assume that all underage sex workers are exploited young girls who have been forced into such work by a vicious pimp. But does this actually reflect the experience of most young, domestic sex workers? Using ethnographic research from Atlantic City and New York City, Anthony Marcus, Chris Thomas, and Amber Horning find that underage sex workers have much more agency in their relationships with pimps than many assume[…]

*rubs eyes*

Yup. It’s real.

It certainly is real! This is a fabulous article: when talking about children working in the industry, it really focuses on their individuality, consent and agency.
👍

In this context, I mean “agency” as in their free, individual choice, not “agency” as I usually mean it to mean “manager/employer/market facilitator”, or “pimp” as they so crudely put it in the article. That really surprised me, the writers are usually very good at using the correct language (e.g. “relationship” instead of the clearly problematic term “exploitation”, and “underage sex worker” instead of “child rape victim”).

“
There are, of course, violent and otherwise abusive pimps: approximately
5 percent of the pimps in the pimp study described such an approach to
pimping.”

The focus on self-identification is great – really, it’s up to the manager to say whether or not they identify as violent. It’s essentialist to assume their violence status for them based on their behaviour or criminal actions.

And indeed, in Figure 1, we see only 7.4% of underage sex workers identified as having a market facilitator.
(A total of 44.2% were initiated into the sex industry by a friend or a relative, but he/she/zxe chooses not to identify as a pimp. Much like when people used to assume Screwdriver Smith was my “handler” just because he kept assigning me contracts and telling me to “do the hit, Gaspar, or the council’ll find your teeth in the next fatberg they dig out of the fucking sewer”, when he was actually my very good friend!)

At all levels, pimps were constantly faced with the danger of being
abandoned for another pimp, an escort agency, or independent work. 

It’s rare that you see the dangers faced by the managers being acknowledged. There’s always a horrific danger that they could lose some of their income!
😧

I appreciate that. I’m also glad the researchers were very positive about the overwhelming 5.6% of underage sex workers who don’t want to leave the industry. I don’t want to leave the sexualised violence industry, so it’s good to see that it represents my interests.
🙂

And I bet
all the SKERFs will argue I’m not representative of these sex workers

because I’m 35 and live in a penthouse flat in Kensington and could probably work somewhere else if I liked, but that’s my choice – there’s nothing stopping any of these children from buying a flat here too, attending an elite university (Carradine College, Oxford, in my case), and networking with employers in other industries.
In fact, Dmitry’s old flat is on the market right now for £1.2 mil. He had to move suddenly and unexpectedly, so he’s lowered the price, hoping for a quick sale. Top floor, 47 Foucault Road. Snap it up, it’s a bargain!

Parliament’s inquiry into the sex industry is misguided and one-sided

Today I am very happy and validated, because I found a rare article in the liberal news media that actually supports the sexualised violence industry: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/oct/26/pop-up-brothels-inquiry-one-sided-sex-workers-criminalisation-nordic-model Yay! ^_^

“An investigation into “pop-up brothels” – short-term lets in which people sell sex – was launched by the all-party parliamentary group on prostitution on Monday…
From its outset the inquiry has distanced itself from the living,
breathing people who sell sex. The UK’s estimated 80,000 sex workers are
reduced to “prostituted women”, their work seen solely as “commercial sexual exploitation”. There seems little room for nuance.”

How dare the government reduce empowered, independent sex workers to mere victims or survivors? Suggesting that any of us suffer violence or don’t consent to our careers is offensive! I love my job, and no amount of trafficking victims and their lived experience can ever erase that.

“The UK desperately needs further inquiries into the sex industry. We
need to know the extent to which austerity is driving women into
prostitution, we need to look honestly at whether immigration policies
create the conditions for trafficking. There is a still a huge gap in
knowledge around the basic makeup of the industry; we need statistics on
who works, where they work, and how.”

Weeell, that’s maybe going a bit too far. How are we supposed to celebrate everyone’s free choice to enter the industry if we investigate whether or not some people are forced into it by poverty or trafficking? (And anyway, how would it affect me? I don’t care whether or not other people are forced into it, that’s their problem.)

In fact, the inquiry’s terms of reference indicate that it is interested
only in “pop-up brothels”, in particular those run by criminal gangs.

That’s better. If we’re interested in finding out about pimping or trafficking, we shouldn’t be looking into criminal gangs. I used to work for a so-called “criminal gang”, and I consented to everything we did! Apart from a couple of times when Sid “The Snake” made me do a hit that we hadn’t agreed on

By narrowing the goalposts of who will be deemed representative of the
industry, the parliamentary group has ensured the vast majority of
workers are silenced.

See? The vast majority of workers don’t work in pop-up brothels or for criminal gangs! I don’t know when this research was done (given the huge gap in knowledge around the basic makeup of the industry) but it’s good to know.

Sex workers don’t use the cringeworthy, hipster term “pop-up brothel”,
but working from short-term lets is common. Either independently or for
managers, sex workers travel for work.

The author is a good ally. I’m always pleased to see the correct language being used, “manager” instead of “pimp” or “handler”, and “sex worker” instead of “trafficking victim” or “stranglewank hitman”.

“Pop-up brothels”, in as much as they exist, are so demonstrably an
effect of criminalisation, this inquiry has already shot itself in the
foot.

This is exactly the reason I have to keep moving to new safehouses, to avoid arrest and prosecution for committing murders. And my clients are always having to pay off or avoid the police, to stop them arresting them for hiring me! Clients who pay for murders, and clients who pay for sex under economic coercion, should be decriminalised!

That exploitation happens in sex work is disputed by no one, least of all sex workers. And danger only increases when people are unable to work from a stable base.

Not to judge our clients or anything; they’re perfectly nice people who shouldn’t be criminalised. But yes, sometimes they do try to “silence” me, or threaten to break my legs if I don’t do a job for them, or refuse to pay me. That still doesn’t mean they deserve to be criminalised though! Really, to blame any one group of people in particular for the danger and exploitation would be wrong. I wouldn’t want anyone to think badly of our clients, managers or agencies. (Though if you’re going to blame someone, blame the mean, bitchy, dried-up old “feminists” who want to send those nice people to prison!)

Worryingly, the parliamentary group has not made links with any
sex-worker-led organisations, and no current sex workers have been
included in framing the initial terms of reference.

I’ve been saying this for a long time now. If someone’s not currently involved in the industry, they have no stake in the issue, since it doesn’t affect them any more. Being a sex worker doesn’t cause any lasting harm, so why should it still affect them?

Each member is strongly in favour of criminalisation in the form of the Nordic model – in which anyone paying for sex is a criminal, and sex workers bodies’ become, by definition, scenes of a crime. This despite sex-worker-led organisations around the world
criticising the approach. The Nordic model adds another layer of
criminalisation to the transaction – so anyone who supports it supports
criminalisation.

Emphasis mine. If you support criminalising me and my clients, you support criminalising my targets! I’m sure everyone agrees it would be ridiculous to criminalise a murder victim, so why would you criminalise me for committing it or my clients for hiring me? Same goes for all crimes, you can’t criminalise the perpetrator without criminalising the victim. That’s just how the legal system works.

We need balance not bigotry. Not one member of the parliamentary group
will be affected by the results of this inquiry, but thousands of sex
workers will. Why, yet again, are so many being excluded?

Well, fortunately, I frequent many of the same clubs as Members of Parliament and drink in the same bars, so hopefully I’ll be able to influence them a bit!
😉 

And if any sex workers want to criminalise their clients (e.g. workers who are trafficked or economically coerced or addicted to drugs or underage), perhaps they could also write a nice article for The Guardian, or use their influence and contacts to put both sides of the issue to the government.

Thank-you for your allyship!
🤗

I’ll do my best to influence the government to support decriminalising our lovely clients!

It’s 2017 and I’m STILL having to explain my work

So my old Yakuza friend Guro Kagaisha was in town to launder some money through the London property market. So we met up and went for a drink, and he said, “Hey Gaspar, remind me what it is you do again?”
“Well, Guro,” said I, “I’m a sex worker specialising in extreme breath play.”
“Oh, yeah, I remember now, you’re a stranglewank hitman,” said he, not very politically correctly, I might add. “So, let me ask you this: do you guys actually give the target a handbeezy or just make it look like you did?”

I was seriously grumpy at that point. It is not my job to educate Guro or anybody, but on this one occasion I said, “buy me a treble Langley’s and a packet of sea salt and balsamic vinegar Kettle Chips and I shall consider doing the emotional labour for you”.

Anyway, as I said to Guro after he’d bought me the required compensation for my emotional labour: I do not “actually give the target a handbeezy”, no. Nor do I make it look as though I did. I choke the target to death, and then I make it look as though the target did it to himself/herself/xorself by accident during a sexual misadventure. The only sexual aspect to it is when I arrange the body post-mortem and put the corpse’s own hand down his/her/xer chinos.

“So,” said Guro, taking a sip of his whisky, “you don’t really do any sex shit then?”
“No, Guro, I do not really do any sex shit,” I sighed.
“So you’re not a sex worker, then, are you?”

Well, I had had just about enough of his gatekeeping, invalidating bullshit by then. How dare he challenge my status as a sex worker?

I AM a sex worker. Sure, I’m not actually selling sex or exposing myself in any way, but what I am selling is the fantasy of erotic asphyxiation. I sell that fantasy to the target’s contacts, and to the police. And that gives me an interest in the industry and the right to speak over people who don’t have inside knowledge about the industry (e.g. former sex workers, survivors, trafficking victims who aren’t involved in it any more and hence have no stake in the issue whatsoever, people still in the industry who don’t want to be there, and people who disagree with me about full legalisation of the sexual violence industry).

Anyway, fortunately, Guro is very good at self-crit. When he was a hitbaby and made a mistake on a job, he even cut off bits of his fingers as part of his self-critting for his boss! What a great ally! ^_^  So he said a big sorry to me and we hung around outside Bank-Monument station for a bit, where he bought me a few grams of coke as compensation for hurting my feelings and invalidating my identity.

So now we’re friends again! 🙂 We’re going to spend the rest of his visit buying houses, planning how to get revenge on Dmitry for poisoning me with polonium (even if it did result in my super edgy new trendsetting fashionqueering haircut), and I’ll introduce him to my pet pigs. Should be a nice relaxing week.

Join Project #SaveEF

evrydayfeminism:

Everyday Feminism is in trouble, y’all. Here’s the bad news – and what it means for you.

JOIN PROJECT #SAVEEF

I’m asking all my followers and former clients to please support great, validating feminist media that is REAL feminism, i.e. inclusive of sadism, sex work legalisation and acceptance, and heterosexual queer-identified men with unusual haircuts such as my good self.

I can’t actually tag any of my clients in this because of the huge stigma against hiring sexualised murder workers (if I named any of them, they could even face prison! That’s why we need decriminalisation now!) But they know how to contact me, and they had a spare £10k to spend on my services, so I’m sure they’ll dig deep to support a great cause!

Join Project #SaveEF

DO. NOT. BE. ASHAMED. OF. YOUR.FETISH.

yourenotafeminist:

As long as everyone is willing and happy don’t be ashamed.

If you like bdsm that’s okay!
If you like furries that’s okay!
If you like fictional girls that’s okay!

Your kinks are your kinks and that’s okay! Everyone is different and we shouldn’t be ashamed! And don’t feel ashamed! It’s dumb to be ashamed of your fetishes. Fetishes as long as they aren’t hurting anyone are a-ok!

This is really validating and lovely to see!
Though I feel I should add that, actually, even hurting people is okay! As the OP says, if you like BDSM, which often includes pain play (and breath play like my work), then that’s okay.

For most of my life, I was shamed for my extreme BDSM breath play sex work by the police and the judiciary, so it makes me happy to see acceptance. Fortunately I was never convicted, I was working for an agency at the time and my manager Sid “The Snake” visited all the members of the jury at home and convinced them of my innocence.

Thank-you for your allyship!!  ^_^

Novara Media are our #allies! <3

I was very surprised and really quite overwhelmed to see an article from Novara Media promoting decriminalisation of the sex industry. I thought with all their previous talk of “exploitation” and “violence” under capitalism, they were against industrious young entrepreneurs like me, but when I saw the headline “5 Reasons We Must Decriminalise the Sex Industry – And Fast”, I realised they must have had a change of heart.
(◠‿◠

)

I am not a pimp or a trafficker. I am neither a rape apologist nor
someone who excuses violence against women. I do not believe men have a
right to buy sex, or that anyone, of any gender, should be forced to
sell sex. One might have thought these things go without saying, and yet
they are examples of some of the vitriol levied at us – those that
advocate for the decriminalisation of the sex industry. 

Your struggle is mine, dear author. I also get very upset when people assume that by saying my clients should be decriminalised, I’m therefore saying that my clients have a right to buy my services. I’m not saying that at all, I’m just saying that if they choose to hire me or any other sex worker, they shouldn’t face any negative consequences for that choice. It’s a clear distinction.

In recent weeks, the establishment media has provided a platform – an
‘everywhere-you-turn’ kind of platform – to anti-prostitution feminists.
Julie Bindel does, after all, have a new book to publicise.

Well, that explains why she magically cares about the sex industry all of a sudden. My old agency said she was a really mean SKERF and banned her work from our premises and I’ve continued that ban as a sole trader so I admit I’m not too familiar with her output. But come on, I’m nearly 35 and in my lifetime, when has she ever cared about sexual violence?

Underpinning the arguments of many anti-prostitution feminists is the
idea that the purchase of sex ought to be criminalised and sex workers
understood as victims of male violence. They argue we should be doing
more to eradicate the sex industry and rescue the sex workers within it. 

The author doesn’t dignify these SKERFy prejudices with a response, so neither shall I.

These anti-prostitution advocates are right about one thing: our sex
work laws require reform. Yet as the English Collective of Prostitutes,
SWARM, and other sex worker-led organisations have said time and again,
it’s only through the decriminalisation of all consensual aspects of the
sex industry that sex workers can be adequately protected. Here are some of the reasons why.

Absolutely. I mean, these sex worker-led organisations are largely run by managers and agencies, but the managers represent the workers after all, so they do indirectly represent us. I’ve been saying for a long time that our managers and clients need to be decriminalised, and Novara Media gives some great additional insights to it.

1. Migrant sex workers are being targeted by the police.
…Decriminalisation would allow (migrant) sex workers to work in
collectives, to look out for one another in an indoor market that is far
safer than its street counterpart. It would mean less fear of the
police and of other agencies.

I don’t know much about this because I’m British, but my foreign colleagues say this is true. They keep getting hassled by the police – though they say it was even worse when they were trying to make a living in legal industries where the employers wanted “paperwork” and “documentation” and “proof of residence” and all that stuff, in fact that’s part of the reason they were contacted by managers and made the free and entirely rational choice to enter the industry.

2. The Modern Slavery agenda is causing more harm than good.
There are, of course, people who are trafficked into and exploited within the sex industry… [But] under this agenda,
voluntary migrant sex workers are being mislabelled as victims of
trafficking and deported under the ‘noble’ guise of rescue.

This is what I’m always saying! I’m a voluntary sex worker and I love my job, and I’m getting really tired of all these thousands of trafficking victims erasing my lived experience with their lived experience.

3. Violent clients are being allowed to act with impunity.
If all laws criminalising consensual sex work are removed… the minority of violent clients would
not then be able to attack sex workers with impunity.

I’m very glad to see journalists acknowledging that only a minority of our clients are violent. Extremist radical SKERFs say that the sexualised murder industry is inherently violent and non-consensual, which isn’t true at all. I mean, we get paid, so that’s consent right there. Only a minority of our clients threaten to break our legs or “silence” us after the job is complete. And I think that in itself is a product of criminalisation: if you criminalise hiring assassins, only criminals will hire us. If it were decriminalised, nice people would want to pay for kinky murders.
In fact, I recall a case where one of my former colleagues eliminated a target who was severely clinically depressed and suicidal and put a hit out on himself! If that’s not consensual, I don’t know what is.

4. Sex workers’ rights are not being recognised.
At TUC conference two weeks ago, delegates voted to reject Motion 39
on the decriminalisation of sex work put forward by ASLEF and supported
by GMB. Harriet Harman spoke at the conference, claiming the sex
industry is exploitative. It seems counter-intuitive that unions would
refuse to offer protection to exploited workers precisely because the industry in which they work can be exploitative.

I posted about this at the time, I was very upset! Harriet Harman sounds like she wants to destroy the whole industry and get all of us out of it rather than support the workers in it. We should have the right to join one of the sex workers unions instead of only our managers and agencies joining them. (I didn’t know the unions offered protection, though – how does it compare, price-wise, to Big Dave and his security services?)

It seems some people remain unwilling to accept that the vast majority
of sex workers have made a rational choice to sell sex. After all, 70%
of female sex workers are thought to be mothers and, like all mothers,
they want to provide for their children. 

That’s certainly a rational choice. Some might say “but if it’s a choice between sex work and not providing for your children, surely that’s no choice at all?”.  Well, perhaps they’d make that choice too, and that’s perfectly rational. All choices are valid! Not everyone would choose the same way, though, and you have to respect that choice. For example, back in his days in the KGB, Dmitry assumed a fake identity, married a local woman and had kids with her as part of his cover, and after he’d gathered the information he needed, he had no qualms whatsoever about walking out on his wife and children and never contacting them again! The Child Support Agency chases him every few months, he told them he was dead years ago but they lost the paperwork.

5. Anti-prostitution advocates are wilfully misrepresenting the sex workers’ rights perspective…
But the majority of sex workers today tell us that criminalising the purchase of sex will not make sex workers safer.

This is also true. These anti-sex work bigots keep saying prejudiced things like “but Gaspar, you’re privileged compared to other sex workers” and “what about all the thousands of survivors who exited the industry and advocate the Nordic model of criminalising the clients and managers”. That’s why it’s nice to see this article cite a study based exclusively on empowered, independent sex workers like myself and not on anyone employed by a manager or  who has since left the industry (although only 52% said they did “feel able to stop sex working if they so wished”, so perhaps they could’ve chosen the sample a bit better). And it focuses on the workers’ beliefs instead of empirical data or crime statistics! Finally, my thoughts and feelings are being treated with the respect they deserve, bwim they are considered empirical facts!

The article finishes with an inspiring message:

What has to happen before the government listens?

Well, I have some hope for the future. It has been suggested that lots of MPs are former clients – none of them has hired me, but I can tell it’s not their first rodeo! ^_< (incidentally, I had nothing to do with the former member for Eastleigh, that was wayyyyy before my time, I was just a schoolboy, I was far too busy committing minor acts of arson and animal cruelty, so stop asking me) Either way, a lot of them are rich assigned-male-at-births, which tends to be the demographic of my client base, and they do vote in their own self-interest. Fingers crossed!

So in summary, a big thank-you and hugs to Novara Media, from your favourite extreme BDSM specialist sex worker
ヘ(^_^ヘ)

The oldest profession

I’ve mentioned before that contract killing is the oldest profession, and murdering people for money is not a new thing – we’ve been around forever, but sadly erased from history. So I just thought I’d share some facts with you lovely folx:

Contract killing occurs in nature

I’m sure you all know that lots of animals prey on other species, but chimpanzees – perhaps our closest living relatives – also kill other chimpanzees for other resources.

“Murder ‘comes naturally’ to chimpanzees”: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-29237276

“Killing competitors improves a male chimp’s access to resources like food and territory”.

I assume they mean male-identifying chimp here. Anyway, the point is, It’s entirely natural and healthy to kill  members of your own species for money.

Assassins have operated all throughout history

Li Fuguo, a powerful official in Tang era China, was killed in 762CE by assassins hired by Emperor Daizong. Julius Caesar was assassinated in 44BCE, and Shakespeare even wrote the play Julius Caesar about it. And these are just the most famous cases – imagine how many other assassins must have operated over the years and had their stories erased from the narrative.
Part of the problem is the stigma against murder work, we have to conceal our identities, which is clearly problematic for all sorts of reasons, and it means our voices are never heard.

It’s in the Bible

Yup, for all the SKERFs side with religious groups in saying our profession is wrong, it’s even in the Bible. Sure, some of the Old Testament says it’s bad:

Deuteronomy 27:25:
‘Cursed be anyone who takes a bribe to shed innocent blood.’ And all the people shall say, ‘Amen.’

But the New Testament has a much nicer take on it. Acts 21:38 mentions “four thousand men of the Assassins”, and Matthew 26:14-16 tells the story of Judas Iscariot, who earned thirty pieces of silver for targeting Jesus (without which the resurrection couldn’t have happened, he had to die first, obvs).

And before y’all say “but Gaspar, those are just paid killings, they lack the sexual element of your trademark stranglewank”, that’s true, but check Mark 6:22-29 – Salome does a sexy dance for King Herod and puts a hit on John the Baptist.

So if you still think sexualised murder work is wrong or immoral, that means you think that all of these murders were wrong too, and you need to self-crit and apologise to our community!