Whenever the left think they can “deal” with prostitution, it will always fall back on having unions.
I feel this is quite a naive way to view the sex trade, and if I am very honest is deeply insulting to many prostituted women and girls.
I believe unionising is just another way of keeping the status quo of the sex trade. Unions will be good for the sellers of prostituted women and girls. Unions are good for the buyers of prostituted women and girls. Unions are good for the minority of privileged women and girls.
But what is the good of unions for the majority of prostituted women and girls.
I am told it may decrease the violence. But I find very hard to believe.
Most violence at work or sexual harassment is dwelt with by unions after the event. Much of it dwelt by negotiating with the employer.
Is this realistic in the sex trade.
Much of the violence done to me and other prostituted women and girls is done so fast and with such extreme violence, that it may too late after the fact.
A john can and will rape, brutally batter, use sexual torture and murder behind closed doors. There will be no union rep telling him not to.
Anyhow, he has the right and entitlement to use his goods whatever way he chooses. After all, the customer is always right.
If the union was to protect the prostituted woman or girl, would her employer really give a damn.
What happens when prostituted women or girls “complain” about their conditions or the violence of particular johns. Would she be internally trafficked to disorientate her. Would she be punish by having even more sexual violence done to he.
Would she be made to disappear.
I know my “employers” would of laugh at the concept of an union.
Hell, I was punished on a regular basis for nothing by gang-rapes or being given as a “gift” to sadistic johns. No union would of been able to stop that.
Especially not unions that choose to ignore that sex trade is built on the violence, and just shows a friendly face to the outside.
But most of the talk about unions is not about the safety and dignity of prostituted women and girls. No, it is about making it clean, safe and easy for men to buy and sell women and girls.
One thing is the focus of the medical welfare of prostituted women and girls.
Sorry, I always thoughts that johns were the ones who may spread STDs, seeing as many of them refuse condoms, many don’t give a damn about infecting prostituted women and girls, and certainly don’t have to think about abortions.
But, it is a good image if prostituted women and girls are protrayed as clean – always with the remainder that they are the problem, never the men that buy and sell them.
Unions may put in more security for prostituted women and girls, but not question whether the security is used or why it is needed in all aspects of the sex trade.
I would question whether the camera in brothels are of much use, or all too often left turn off or use for voyeurism by the security staff.
I have know of too many times when women have press the alarm, for it to be ignored by the security for “roughing up” is just part of her job.
Also, many johns can do maximum damage in a very short time, so security can do very little.
It takes less than two minutes to murder someone. I have been battered and tortured in a very short period of time.
And often I remember that there were my employer standing outside the door listening to the violence.
How do unions protect prostituted women and girls when the propaganda of the sex trade said that all the violence is just a normal part of the job.
I do not write with answers.
But I would say why unions are seen as the only way forward, then we live in a society that said it acceptable for men to have entitlement to buy and sell women for sex.
A society that will make any violence done to a class named as prostitutes invisible. If there is violence, it is just seen as part of the job.
Unions do little or nothing to make real changes there.
That why I still fight for a society that can envision abolition, not just moving the chairs around.