tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post4791068625920979355..comments2024-03-28T11:31:11.928+00:00Comments on Penny Red: The Poppy Project: the showdown...Penny Redhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07677315565893516941noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-34663654962368399492021-12-27T07:31:13.865+00:002021-12-27T07:31:13.865+00:00It’s going to be end of mine day, but before end I...It’s going to be end of mine day, but before end I am reading this wonderful piece of writing to increase my experience. <a href="https://www.789bet.biz/casino/" rel="nofollow"> 789 คาสิโน </a>Casino-789bettinghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06493578080795318681noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-55413087123473581932020-02-09T15:47:40.784+00:002020-02-09T15:47:40.784+00:00Good job in presenting the correct content with th...Good job in presenting the correct content with the clear explanation.<br /><a href="https://tipshint.com/how-to-improve-sales/" rel="nofollow">how to improve sales</a><br />Rajinderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10834226434349512562noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-9596330386139136092008-12-09T19:17:00.000+00:002008-12-09T19:17:00.000+00:00This might be of interest?http://www.guardian.co.u...This might be of interest?<BR/><BR/><BR/>http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/dec/08/prostitution-open-doorAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-73622370960422042782008-11-19T17:36:00.000+00:002008-11-19T17:36:00.000+00:00from 'redpesto':PennyRed: If they are being forced...from 'redpesto':<BR/><BR/>PennyRed: <I>If they are being forced into prostitution, if they are raped on the job, or if someone does not pay, then that is not consent and should be treated as rape.</I><BR/><BR/>I know what you mean, and agree - but I suspect that last example is 'breach of contract' (i.e. the intention to pay) rather than rape (the absence of consensual sex).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-54218761471861958892008-11-19T16:08:00.000+00:002008-11-19T16:08:00.000+00:00If you read what I said, if there was a system for...If you read what I said, if there was a system for making sure that necrophilia was consenting - carrying a donor card, for instance? - then I wouldn't technically have a problem with it at all. Like with abortion, just cause some people find it squicky doesn't mean it's wrong.<BR/><BR/>I think fucking a corpse is probably more unhygienic, on balance, than preparing meat - particularly if grave-diving. But consent is the key issue here, and we should remember the differences between prostitutes and, well, dead bodies before we get too carried away.<BR/><BR/>Prostitutes are being paid for a job of work which involves their body on a highly intimate level. That is consent. If they are being forced into prostitution, if they are raped on the job, or if someone does not pay, then that is not consent and should be treated as rape.<BR/><BR/>Is it possible to rape a corpse? I don't think it's the same thing. But I think people should probably be allowed to decide what happens to their remains after death, otherwise it's at least the moral equivalent of breaking and entering. As I said before, I can see situations where consent could be arranged, and that would be okay.<BR/><BR/>However, a) comparing necrophilia to prostitution is ugly. With the one, the rape 'victim' is by definition JUST a body; with the other the entire person is involved.<BR/><BR/>b) there really aren't many necrophiles out there at all.Penny Redhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07677315565893516941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-91920013389463822952008-11-19T14:16:00.000+00:002008-11-19T14:16:00.000+00:00"I think it's wrong for other reasons: because it'...<I>"I think it's wrong for other reasons: because it's disrespectful to the dead"</I><BR/><BR/>They're dead - they don't care. Until zombies start marching through London demanding their rights I don't really care either.<BR/><BR/><I>"and frighteningly unhygenic to the point of being reckless with public health."</I><BR/><BR/>So's selling, preparing and eating meat - kids die every year from meat-borne bacteria even in this country. HIV originated in meat and bird flu started on a chicken farm. Whereas I don't know of anyone dying from corpse-shagging-borne illnesses.<BR/><BR/>I think you basically just don't like the idea of necrophilia and your mind is making up reasons why it should be illegal. Now there's nothing wrong with that especially, it happens to all of us, but that's exactly what anti-abortionists do. So don't blame them for it - they're in exactly the same position as you, except you don't like necrophilia and they don't like abortion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-80787743125461495572008-11-19T11:11:00.000+00:002008-11-19T11:11:00.000+00:00Necrophiliacs must on the whole be people who enjo...Necrophiliacs must on the whole be people who enjoy having sex without the other person's consent, let alone their enjoyment. And I for one find that ethically unsound.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-27469812117516396342008-11-19T10:57:00.000+00:002008-11-19T10:57:00.000+00:00from 'redpesto'tyra: The act of one person paying ...from 'redpesto'<BR/><BR/>tyra: <I>The act of one person paying another for sex is predicated on the buyer viewing sex as a service, when in fact, it is not, it is a two-way street. If sex is enjoyable for both parties (which it is), then what exactly is the buyer paying for? A consent which otherwise wouldn't be given? Looks like coercion of the vulnerable to me, which of course is one step away from rape.</I><BR/><BR/>But if you pay someone to cook you a meal (or indeed for any other service) which you could otherwise get for free (even if only as a favour or out of kindness), wouldn't the same argument apply? Would I be coercing someone because I offered to pay them for it? Or am I paying them for their time, skill, and labour? I think your argument relies more on the idea that 'sex' is somehow an exception to the rule, for reasons that are never made clear by opponents of prostitution (or pornography). If the parties freely agree to have sex, and agree that there should be a financial exchange, it is difficult to see how the law could or should intervene: a point Jacqui Smith has already conceded in a recent <A HREF="http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/nov/16/prostitution-women-lapdancing" REL="nofollow">interview</A>:<BR/><BR/><I>She had ruled out a universal ban on paid sex because some women argued they did it out of choice 'and it's not my job to criminalise the demand for that'.</I><BR/><BR/>As I see it, the cornerstone of the governments reforms on sexual offences is the principle of consent. If a woman cannot give her consent because of fears of retribution from a third party, then I think the case could be made for a change in the law (though I would have thought this was covered by the reforms of the Sexual Offences Act from earlier this decade). The problem is that (a) the government has a long history of policing people's sexual behaviour (see the 'extreme pornography' legislation); (b) there's been more moral grandstanding on the issue of prostitution than there has been effective legislative proposals (Smith is already spinning the idea that the proposals will somehow shame men into not paying for sex, as opposed to them taking precautions that they don't break the proposed law when they do). Oddly enough, the proposed changes might simply encourage women to set up all-female co-operative brothels (no nasty male pimps!), or work as self-employed freelancers, as a way round the planned legislation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-2923721283459584102008-11-19T00:12:00.000+00:002008-11-19T00:12:00.000+00:00Necrophilia's an interesting one, actually. I don'...Necrophilia's an interesting one, actually. I don't find it morally repugnant as a sexual practice - at least nobody gets hurt - just distasteful. I think it's wrong for other reasons: because it's disrespectful to the dead and frighteningly unhygenic to the point of being reckless with public health. <BR/><BR/>There are good reasons for necrophilia being illegal, but if there were enough of a necrophiliac lobby, I wouldn't see a problem with, say, people donating their bodies for the relief of necrophiles within sanitised conditions. Hmm.Penny Redhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07677315565893516941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-64915706066737482812008-11-18T23:57:00.000+00:002008-11-18T23:57:00.000+00:00anon: what point are you trying to make?anon: what point are you trying to make?Penny Redhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07677315565893516941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-27086702615175306602008-11-18T17:09:00.000+00:002008-11-18T17:09:00.000+00:00So why is necrophilia wrong, again?P.S You're not ...So why is necrophilia wrong, again?<BR/><BR/>P.S You're not allowed to say anything which is equivalent to "I feel disgust when I think about it".Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-2369980043776505622008-11-18T02:30:00.000+00:002008-11-18T02:30:00.000+00:00If I've read you correctly, you are wrong, Penny R...If I've read you correctly, you are wrong, Penny Red.<BR/><BR/>The point is exactly that buying sex is wrong. The law <I>does</I> exist to police people's morality, which is why rape and sexual assault and paedophilia and necrophilia are all illegal.<BR/><BR/>The act of one person paying another for sex is predicated on the buyer viewing sex as a service, when in fact, it is not, it is a two-way street. If sex is enjoyable for both parties (which it is), then what exactly is the buyer paying for? A consent which otherwise wouldn't be given? Looks like coercion of the vulnerable to me, which of course is one step away from rape. <BR/><BR/>The existence of prostitution means that even if we have nothing to do with it, you and I live in a world where all men know that they can purchase sex any time they wish, thereby perpetuating the subjugation of women's experience to that of men.<BR/><BR/>Never mind "ALL women", it's not ok to treat ANY woman "like a whore".<BR/><BR/>And there <I>should</I> be a stigma around women who prostitute themselves willingly (in preference, say, to working at McDonalds), because they too participate in the notion that it's ok. It's not.<BR/><BR/>Nevertheless, the fact is that trafficked women are not prostitutes, they are multiple rape victims (among other things), and should be treated as such.<BR/><BR/>Then I start to wonder whether being forced into prostitution by violence is that much different from being forced into it by drug addiction, a history of abuse, extreme poverty and so on.....<BR/><BR/>You see how my thoughts are going. This is muddy water, but I still think you are wrong wrong wrong. Big it up to Denise.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-45895936863002049682008-11-17T22:31:00.000+00:002008-11-17T22:31:00.000+00:00Highon rebellion: on your first point, yes. On you...Highon rebellion: on your first point, yes. On your second, it seems from the meeting I had that Poppy are actually looking at ways of extending their help to eg. women trafficked into domestic servitude - i.e not specifically sex work - and as far as I can tell this is an internal initiative. Which is heartening as, as you rightly point out, it's the logical extension of their arguments.Penny Redhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07677315565893516941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-27114754841793410862008-11-17T22:29:00.000+00:002008-11-17T22:29:00.000+00:00Duly fixed, thank you! Apologies for typing and sl...Duly fixed, thank you! Apologies for typing and sleeping.<BR/>xPenny Redhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07677315565893516941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-54922336857909194792008-11-17T16:03:00.000+00:002008-11-17T16:03:00.000+00:00The sentence. "Legal prohibition often creates mo...The sentence. "Legal prohibition often creates more problems than it solves, and certainly in Sweden and New Zealand, where the 'Swedish model' of criminalising the purchase of sex has been implemented, life has become riskier for the women who choose to stay in the sex trade."<BR/><BR/>Think you have that wrong, hopefully a mistype. New Zealand has actually decriminalized prostitution, making is safer for sex workers, and easier for safe working conditions like brothels to be managed by non criminal types. In fact a Governemnet review has show this to be quite a success.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-39267051203028570002008-11-17T00:27:00.000+00:002008-11-17T00:27:00.000+00:00Really interesting post. One thing, however: clien...Really interesting post. One thing, however: clients aren't criminalised in New Zealand. Many sex workers' rights activists actually see the New Zealand system as a model of good practice.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-48900729199792809092008-11-15T15:51:00.000+00:002008-11-15T15:51:00.000+00:00"Right now, though, we are more alike than we are ..."Right now, though, we are more alike than we are unalike. And we have work to do."<BR/><BR/>This is the most heartening thing I've read for ages.<BR/><BR/>(Applauds)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4343658614010405479.post-52525340531541079902008-11-14T17:01:00.000+00:002008-11-14T17:01:00.000+00:00I was aware that the conditions the Project impose...I was aware that the conditions the Project imposes on those that seek help were a condition of their funding, so I didn't really blame them for that.<BR/><BR/>However, I do think they do damage with their contention that ALL migrant sex workers are "trafficked", especially since the actual meaning of the word is so slippery. It can mean literally kidnapped off the streets and brought to the UK against your will; that you came to the UK knowingly but did not know you would be a sex worker; that you did know you would be a sex worker but were lied to about conditions of employment; or often that you came through a route set up by a criminal gang, which frankly can be said for a lot of people in the UK without status.<BR/><BR/>Also, did you find out if they do any lobbying on immigration issues? Because even if it's not their fault, at the moment their organisation does prop up the "law & order" approach to trafficking, where the human rights of migrants are secondary (or often tertiary) to jailing traffickers. Do they do any activism to try to get the government to adopt a more "human-rights" based approach?<BR/><BR/>I think there's an issue with the feminist movement generally wrt the complete disinterest in migrant women's rights if those women are not trafficked sex workers. But that's not really the fault of the Poppy Project - they never claimed to be advocating on behalf of ALL migrant women.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com