Introduction
Searching for meaning in life is what humans do. How we are able to have that happen depends on the experiences life sends our way, how we process those experiences, what we attempt to do with them, and the resources and support we bring to the effort or that come our way. Journalist Melanie Phillips has written an article about the lessons that life gives us and how we can make meaning out of adversity if we are only determined enough to overcome it and rebuild our lives. She includes the stories of two Brits, Claire Lomas and Tina Nash, but I suggest that she has done so in a manner that is demeaning towards many other survivors of adversity, and perhaps towards the two couples she is writing about, as their circumstances are so very different.
Claire Lomas was paralyzed from the chest down after being thrown from her horse in 2007. Tina Nash was beaten and blinded in an attack by her boyfriend in 2011.
Ex-boyfriends and motherhood
In ‘The lesson we can all learn,’ about Claire Lomas and Tina Nash, Melanie Phillips seems to be drawing a comparison between their boyfriends. Her telling of the stories of the two women, both of whom were let down by the man in their life, implies that the men’s intentions were similar, and that the consequences of their actions were the same for both – devastation followed by a much-deserved new life without them. About Claire’s former boyfriend she writes:
“After enduring the devastating impact of a boyfriend who had failed to support her when she needed him most after her accident, she married a man who did care for her — as a result of which she managed to gave birth to a baby daughter " (The lesson we can all learn, 2012).
Phillips writes more on the subject of Claire and motherhood:
“Ms Lomas says her life is better in so many ways than before her accident because she now has her husband and child. This ability to find something positive even in such personal catastrophe is nothing less than a profound affirmation of life itself” (The lesson we can all learn, 2012).
Yet clearly the pair had a certain kind of life in mind when they moved into the farmhouse three years before the accident, one that didn’t involve motherhood. From another article in the Mail (The REAL reason, 2012) , it sounds as though Claire wasn’t ready to settle down and become a mother at the time the accident occurred. On the contrary, she was deeply involved in living her independent life, working as a chiropractor and following her horse pursuits. Sadie Nicholas writes:
“She began riding as a toddler, eventually qualifying as a four-star equestrian eventer; the highest status possible and the same level as Zara Phillips. Only the most accomplished riders achieve this. So devoted was Claire to her horses that she spent the majority of her chiropractor’s salary on them, sacrificing holidays to do so” (Real reason, 2012).
Thus, Melanie Phillips’s article goes beyond the pale in criticizing the live-in boyfriend Claire had before the accident, for leaving her at this most vulnerable time in her life when she was thrown from her horse and paralyzed. Going back to the farmhouse afterwards wouldn't have been an option for Claire, as she needed care and support he couldn't provide. Instead, she went to her parents’ home. Five years later, Claire demonstrated the ‘bionic’ robot suit in the London Marathon, 2012, over a period of 16 days.
What Phillips doesn’t seem to recognize is that it wasn't only Claire’s life that was thrown into turmoil – her ex’s was too. I assume he had a job he had to go to, and not as a research scientist with access to resources, and knowledge about what to expect and how to cope. Claire was no longer able to fulfil the expectations (unspoken or otherwise) of the relationship, and neither could he. When something like that happens it is devastating to all concerned, as life has to begin anew, with different goals, often with different friends and relationships.
Tina’s story is horrific, though nothing about her life before that day has been told, except that she had two children, one a teenager, the other a toddler. The attack was committed by her boyfriend, leaving her with injuries and worse yet, blind.
Sometimes women experience such immense tragedies that they are held up as examples to the world of the suffering women endure at the hands of men. Likewise, men capable of such deeds are held up as examples also. Tina Nash is one such woman, while her now ex-boyfriend, Shane Jenkin, is one such man (see Blinded woman, 2012). Their story is entirely different than Claire Lomas’s and her ex-boyfriend, Claire’s paralysis being the result of an accident, not a physical attack.
Tina’s experience of having to endure the emotional scars of a physical attack by someone she was in a relationship with, as well as the resulting blindness, places her experience well within the categories of domestic violence and ‘violence against women.’ This makes her an ideal advocate for these causes (Blinded woman, 2012), and the ex-boyfriend, Shane Jenkins, a perfect example of the kind of violence that concerns feminists most – the kind that is directed by the man towards someone with whom he was in an intimate relationship. Moreover, the violence was not vaguely directed towards women in general, and Jenkins was not distanced from it by using a rifle.
In Canada, the man feminists most love to hate for his violence is Marc Lépine, remembered for having shot and killed 14 women at the Polytechnique in Montreal on Dec 6, 1989, though his passion had been to do something about feminists taking over careers and places in education traditionally held for men, not a relationship gone sour (see ‘Montreal Massacre 1989 – 2009’, 2009.) Lépine died at the scene of the killings, but Shane Jenkins, at his trial, admitted to the crime of ‘grievous bodily harm with intent,’ was given a life sentence, and sent to a secure psychiatric unit for treatment (see Blinded woman, 2012).
Star-gazing
Phillips writes, "For those of us immersed in the raucous arena of politics and public affairs, these two stories [Claire and Tina] surely provided a most salutary counterpoint. It was like looking at the world through the other end of a telescope. Suddenly, that shallow and venal public world shrank into relative insignificance, and the people in it and all their activities seemed puny and irrelevant.”
On the other hand, Claire and Tina had themselves suddenly been cast into the world of politics and public affairs - not necessarily a bad thing, as public support was what they needed if their favourite charities and their lives were to move forward. Being in the public eye and rewarded by it was no less a concern for them at this time than it would have been for Phillips, in her job as journalist.
It’s an error of perspective to view Tina and Claire as somehow being in the ‘real world’ of ordinary life and its practical problems (although at the same time, unique in their ability to deal with adversity), whereas Ms Phillips’s life was only about politics, policies, and theory. It’s hardly an accurate depiction of the way these stories have affected England and the world. Claire and Tina being struck by adversity had an effect on the public, but not due to their being more real, or down-to-earth than most others, or their facing practical problems in an exceptional manner due to personal attributes. For the most part, that has been an image of their lives constructed by their supporters and the media.
Although the women are unique in some ways they aren’t the only people in the world who have had to seek ways of dealing with adversity and find new meaning in their lives. It’s an everyday phenomenon, despite the way Phillips talks about it. There’s no real reason to raise the two to such an elevated status.
Inspirational role models or celebrity-gazing?
“This, instead, is surely what really matters — how we all live our lives, how we cope with the bad times as well as the good, whether we can all similarly find within ourselves such strength of character to overcome the most shattering adversity” (Phillips, The lesson we can all learn, 2012).
I question whether holding up such examples of adversity is the way to give such advice to the general public. In fact, I question whether most people need it (see comments on ‘A life with purpose lasts longer,' 2009).
Phillips writes that “Claire Lomas and Tina Nash . . . are determined instead to be not life’s losers but its winners. Their example is inspiring because they tell us what human nature is capable of achieving — and, therefore, what we, too, might achieve.”
I’m not certain that the stories of these two women can inform us of the heights to which “human nature” can be elevated. Surely, the right circumstances are necessary if this is to happen – the right social, economic, and political environment, as well as the strength of character and commitment of the women. Phillips is making these scenarios appear individualistic – as though the women achieved what they have through their own effort alone.
The conclusion Phillips makes, “therefore, what we, too, might achieve” doesn’t apply unless the person is able to access resources the same way these women could. Sometimes, circumstances fall into place – the right time, the right place, the support one needs. At other times, it’s not there, making it more a matter of luck than individual effort.
One can see how Tina Nash could herself become a valuable resource in the fight against domestic violence, and why she would want this as a goal in her life. Furthermore, one can see why Claire Lomas was just the right person to promote the robot suit and the charity for spinal cord research, and why she would want to work towards raising money for spinal cord research. They are assets for the cause, and their involvement provides them with purpose in their lives, and gives meaning to the adversity they endured. While that is to be applauded, suggesting that the women represent the highest form of human nature, as Phillips does, is an exaggeration or even a misapplication of the term.
But is their example inspiring to most other people, as Ms Phillips suggests? Speaking for myself, I’m not inspired by them in the way that Phillips suggests – “because they tell us what human nature is capable of achieving — and, therefore, what we, too, might achieve.” Of course, just as Phillips herself has been inspired to write about the two women, so have I been inspired to write this in response. Inspiration works in strange ways.
For some readers and onlookers, hearing about either of these two women may have emphasized their own struggles and provided inspiration because of that feeling of shared connection. In fact, Claire herself has said that the person who has impressed her most of all the celebrities who have given their support has been Matt Hampson, paralyzed on the rugby field (Claire Lomas: Matt Hampson, 2012). The mutual interest in sports and helping other young people injured at sports, and the injury itself, would be things they have in common.
For other readers, celebrity-gazing may have been the main aim. If admirers of Claire and Tina are looking only at how each has dealt with adversity, yet have no personal understanding of it, or empathy, then it comes across more as hero worship or celebrity-gazing than any real source of inspiration for themselves, in dealing with adversity in their own lives.
Being close to or feeling a connection to a star where there is none may still provide them with a sense of meaning, being able to show support in some way. We don’t all get the opportunity to engage in activities that shower us with rewards, but providing support to those who already have a great deal can make us feel a part of the total effort – a social connection, and more than that – a connection to someone who has power and whose capabilities knows no bounds.
Sentimentality
There is more that I feel inspired to respond to in this piece by Melanie Phillips, who makes a point of announcing the two women’s achievements by admonishing the experience of ordinary people, saying, “In our sentimentalised culture where so many rush to label themselves victims in order to gain some advantage . . .” .
Phillips isn’t clear about who or what groups in society she is complaining about in this sentence, but it appears to be about other people who have suffered adversity, or perhaps those who have not suffered adversity but simply claim they have, “in order to gain some advantage.”
It’s out of necessity that some people in society have to declare themselves as unable to work, or unable to walk, or name some other disease so that they may claim state benefits so they can survive, though placing a label on their condition is not the same as being a victim. But if they don’t manage to acquire enough to enable them to move forward in their lives, then are they victims? (see Tanni Grey-Thompson warns, 2012)
Some may even claim benefits for what appears to be no good reason, but surely, that’s not who I’m writing about here. And not all of them will have the right capabilities or get the opportunity to learn to use a robot suit or buy one for their own use. Nor will all women’s bad experiences in their marriages be severe enough to lead them to be welcomed as spokespersons for the cause.
Phillips appears to be taking the viewpoint that possibly, some people don’t need the state’s help, but are simply lazy (or as others have labeled them, ‘couch potatoes’), and if they only tried harder, or looked for appropriate work, or ran a marathon, they too would receive favourable publicity enabling them and their charity to celebrate their changed fortune.
In almost every article written about Claire Lomas, someone has commented on her determination and bravery, whereby the social support she has received has been seen as a result of her determination – as ‘deserved’ – not as a cause of it. More likely, the determination and social support are an evolving process, each leading to the other, resulting in the cause growing larger and stronger, and her determination also growing. Social support is known to have that effect. Claire used the bionic suit in to participate in the London marathon, setting her apart from others in the marathon and those who had previously tried it out (see Britain’s bionic man, 2012; Robot Suit Helps Paraplegic, 2011).
Others may be left to struggle with their illness or following tragedy of some sort, with no social support. So who is it really, that are the “sentimentalised” in our culture – people who are left struggling to survive adversity, or the ordinary people and the media, such as Melanie Phillips, who make a point of idealizing people in the public eye? Claire has found purpose in her life, in part at least, wearing the robotic suit, with more support than most people can only imagine in their own lives.
Epiphany or gradual realization: living life with a different purpose
Perhaps Claire experienced an epiphany, discovering through the accident that it was family that mattered most – a loving husband and especially, having a child of her own – affirmation of life itself. Or could it have been the chance to have a robotic suit that was the epiphany?
Rather than always look towards others for inspiration, it makes as much sense or even more for people to look inwardly, towards their own bodies and lives for the inspiration that comes from that. For both Claire Lomas and Tina Nash, their own lives are the source of their inspiration, though granted, each had experienced a crisis situation.
When I read about Claire and Tina, I don’t feel inspired by what they have gone through or how they are reinventing themselves. The reality for me is that, those times I have been inspired by someone’s actions, by how they found purpose in their own life, I have ended up feeling only disappointment. No matter how hard I try, or how much of myself I put into it, the fact is that it’s virtually impossible to achieve as much as the original achievement, or the person behind it that I had admired.
Conclusion
Ms Phillips tells us how we can make meaning out of adversity if we are only determined enough to overcome it and rebuild our lives. This kind of psychologizing can leave people with a sense of defeat if their efforts show few or no good results. An epiphany is an epiphany only in retrospect. Otherwise, it’s just a dream. Not taking no for an answer only works if someone else is there to say yes. No one lives completely alone and independently in society.
It is generous of Melanie Phillips to devote her skills and time to honour these women, but is this the best response to their circumstances, raising them up to the level of celebrities, examples of humanity extraordinaire? Can women who are abused to a lesser extent see themselves in Tina’s place, or was her experience so horrendous that others can only marvel at her fortitude and be thankful it didn’t happen to them? Is Claire just an ordinary mom, or was she an expert horsewoman destined for an esteemed future, and now selected especially to demonstrate the robot suit.
Claire Lomas’s accidental, unintentional fall from a horse and the physical attack on Tina Nash by her boyfriend are part of what make their circumstances clearly distinct from one another. To say they are both examples of adversity to be overcome takes away from the different path each one will take, and from the effort of so many others with what some might see as lesser forms of adversity.
Blinded woman Tina Nash makes domestic violence appeal
By Rob Williams
May 11, 2012
Independent
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/blinded-woman-tina-nash-makes-domestic-violence-appeal-7737380.html
Britain's bionic man: Robot suit allows Olympic torch bearer, 22, to walk again five years after seafront car smash: David Follett
By Daily Mail Reporter
Daily Mail
Apr 19, 2012
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2132059/Britains-bionic-man-Robot-suit-allows-Olympic-torch-bearer-22-walk-again.html
Claire Lomas: Matt Hampson impressed me more than any star
Leicester Mercury
May 19, 2012
http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/Claire-Lomas-Matt-Hampson-impressed-star/story-16127816-detail/story.html
The lesson we can all learn from the quiet heroism of these two women
By Melanie Phillips
Daily Mail
May 13, 2012
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2143945/Claire-Lomas-Tina-Nash-The-lesson-learn-quiet-heroism-women.html
A life with purpose lasts longer, researchers find
By Carla Wintersgill
Globe and Mail
Jun 18, 2009
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health/a-life-with-purpose-lasts-longer-researchers-find/article1184477/
Montreal Massacre 1989 - 2009
By Sue McPherson
Sue’s Views on the News
Dec 6, 2009
http://suemcpherson.blogspot.com/2009/12/montreal-massacre-1989-2009-selection.html
The REAL reason marathon woman deserves a medal: Let down by her ex when she needed him most... and how she found happiness with her husband
By Sadie Nicholas
Daily Mail
May 13, 2012
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2143641/The-REAL-reason-marathon-woman-deserves-medal-Let-ex-needed--happiness-husband.html#ixzz1uklPGlIf
Robot Suit Helps Paraplegic Walk Again: Amanda Boxtel
Thomas Moore, science correspondent
Sky News
Oct 21, 2011
http://news.sky.com/home/technology/article/16093536
Tanni Grey-Thompson warns that Paralympic legacy is threatened by cuts
By Patrick Butler, social policy editor
guardian.co.uk
May 20, 2012
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/may/20/tanni-grey-thompson-paralympics-legacy?CMP=EMCNEWEML1355
2 May, 2012
Marathon athletes - the bravery of Claire Lomas, Terry Fox, and others
A few days ago I happened to come across an article about the bravery of one of the participants in the London marathon, in Britain. The history of this event, and its structure, can be found online using a search engine. Almost from the beginning, I found I was in the wrong place. This wasn't an objective article about someone running in the marathon. This was a support sytem, an update log, for supporters of Clarie Lomas.
The article itself was biased to the extreme, and the comments were no better. I have not seen comments before - well maybe I have - that distorted the truth so astoundingly, without hesitance, with no apparent sense of integrity or need to say anything more except to pretend. The falsehoods that were being spoken were beyond belief, the absolute loyalty of most of the commenters (and as it turned out, the moderators as well) was appalling, though it has to be taken into consideration that they were coming at this from the persoective of the well-off in Britain.
There seemed to be no qualms at distorting the truth in an attempt to persuade readers to donate to Claire's cause - spinal research - and apparently to the cost of her robot suit and her pysiotherapist, 5 star hotels, etc, as well as continuing medical care that in most likelihood would never be available to anyone but the most popular people in the country.
One of the first questions I asked was whether Claire required a physiotherapist to stand behind her every step of the way, in her marathon attempt which should take about 2 or 3 weeks. The abrupt answer was Of course, as though it was not a subject to be discussed further and no more information need to be given out. I wasn't the only person to wonder about the sense of letting Claire do this, as what was obvious was that she was totally dependent on her physiotherapist, her medical team, her family, and all those who supported her "independence." Yes, did you catch that.
Is this what is now considered to be independence - walking in a $70,000 bionic suit, unable to travel alone, do many of the typical things a person does for oneself, unable to care for one's child, or cook meals for hubby, or many other things I haven't mentioned here. Yet, people in the article discussion were claiming just that - that Claire was independent.
How anyone can think that a person who comes to this mainly because she comes from money, has money, had a career, and is youthful and lovely to look at, can represent the idea of 'bravery' is beyond me. There are so many others out there - marathon participants included - who must have to struggle to walk, or get into their wheelchair, and have to deal with doing their daily tasks alone without help, with far less assistance from the medical community, than Claire has. I doubt that a day ever went by that she didn't know that she would be taken care of, would be given the best care that money could buy, the best treatment. Has she ever experienced doubt, that her family and friends - and the medical community - would care for her?
Even her marriage seems like something out of a fairy tale, not the kind of experience most women would have if they went on an online dating service, paralyzed from the chest down. How lucky would a girl have to be to attract a research scientist? Claire went on to marry her internet date, got pregnant, and had a child. But out of human interest, isn't it normal to be curious about how she cares for the child, or is it like the question about the physiotherapist. One should not ask such things.
It reminds me of the story, the Emperor with No Clothes, how everyone ignored the reality of the sitution and simply pretended, because they had to, because those with power said they should. And yet, I can't think of any situation so artificial, so pretentious, so unreal, so false, as this situation - this girl's life. Even our own Kate and William, who some may criticize because of their Royal connections, come across as real, as like us in so many ways. They walk and talk and work and look after the house and go on trips. They are independent, in mind and body, and in the way they live their lives.
This new tale brings the story of the Emperor up-to-date, as it is based on techonology, re-invention, the concept of relativity (there is no one truth, it's all perspective), and, I would add, the idea that a young woman can do it all, and have it all - the marriage and children, a home, earning a living, participating athletically, contributing meaningfully, etc. So if a slight distortion of the truth surrounding the facts of the situation is required in order that the masses believe in Claire and her life, and that it really does relate to our own, well so be it.
I don't like to think of people donating to her cause because they have been encouraged to see her as someone special - as independent, giving her all to a cause which will supposedly help all spinal injuries sufferers, because the truth is, in any medical innovation or expensive treatment, it's not the ordinary person who benefits. It's ordinary people who often give from their meagre resources, looking up to someone whose image is being projected as saintlike, determined, brave to the extreme, but the reality is that it is more likely to be the unheralded ordinary person who shows bravery, suffering in silence and without the steady support from family, community and the medical system, as they particpate in the marathon, or just try to survive, from day to day.
To me, newpapers are places where one reads the news and gets to hear the well-informed opinions of journalists and others, not a place to provide support, and persuade readers to give money, for a cause which is suspect in the first place in its integrity, worth, and usefulness. I hold the author of the article, Cole Moreton, responsible for instigating such a farce, and the ready and willing supporters in the comments section of the article for their narrow-mindedness and general bad attitude towards anyone who questioned the worth of supporting Claire's cause and the statements that were being said about her.
On one level, I pondered the question of how many people would benefit from additional funds put into money for spinal research, and how many patients would actually be able to walk afterwards due to the inspiration of Clair Lomas. I wonder how many other patients would have welcomed the opportunity to try out the bionic legs and participate in the marathon, and how many are simply left to watch from their beds.
On another level, I questioned the idea of 'progress' itself, commenting that
"It always feels good to 'progress,' even though we know that progress isn't always the best route to take. I know, I'm not perfect either. I had virtually abandoned old posts on my blog, Sue's Views on the News, in favour of writing on new and current topics. Having to maintain the old, update the links, etc, is never as inspiring or as much fun. But underneath it all, it is as important as writing new posts. It is the foundation on which we build - our blog, or in the case of healthcare, our country. Letting the old drop away, mistreated, without attention, is not the sign of a healthy society.
There's a fine line between stagnation and progress, one being too much remaining stuck in present circumstances, the other being too intent on moving forward, continuously. We already know how badly our health systems are suffering, financially, with physiotherapists, doctors, and adequate health care not available to all people equally. So why heap so much on this one girl, and this single health condition, to benefit the ones who can afford it, when people all over the 'civilized' world are suffering." End of comment
I encourage readers to read the Comments section of the article 'Is this the bravest,' which I saved in a separate document (see below) as I came to realize that comments were being interfered with by the moderators. Also in the comments section of that article I mention Terry Fox, the one-legged Canadian whose determination, with virtually no financial backing, took on the task of crossing Canada to raise money for cancer research, until the cancer took his life a few months later, at age 22. He was just an ordinary person, a true sportsman, back then in 1980 when he ran his Marathon of Hope.
Added May 5, 2012
It look as though even more posts have been tampered with, in the comments section following the Cole Moreton article. Personal comments made about me, to me, by some of the commenters, have been removed. Many of my comments have been labeled ‘edited’ although most haven’t been changed, just the ones that say things they don’t want to hear, about class, mainly, meaning money.
See ‘Richard Branson’ for the latest on the medal controversy. He and the Virgin group will be honouring Claire with a trophy for her effort.
This is Eddie Kidd’s website: http://www.eddiekidd.com/#/home/4548358397 . He was a stunt rider injured in a motorcycle show who received brain injuries as well as damaging his spinal cord (mentioned by a commenter in the Leicester Mercury).
For those interested in more stories of determination, see the website of marine engineer Alex T Smith, at http://alexwillwalkagain.com/2008/09/ , for his story of spinal injury, his successes in rehabilitation, and the continuing struggle for the treatment he needs.
Hairdresser Claire Squires (see Claire Squires Samaritans) pushed herself beyond the limits of normal endurance, as so many do while running the marathon; sadly, she lost her life before reaching the finishing line, resulting in an outpouring of grief and generosity.
Added May 10, 2012
In the newspaper's comments in the Apr 28 Telegraph article, 'Is this the bravest...', the subject of independence had come up. Claire was described as independent, despite surely having almost every aspect of her life dependent on the good will of others (or money paid, since selflessness is not a desirable trait, according to some readers). I doubt that she cooked or cleaned, or drove a car. She was followed at every step of the marathon by her physiotherapist, although I noticed by the end of the walk news article were saying it was her husband who walked behind her. She married and had a child some time after the accident, but I don't see how it would have been possible for her to help with the practical care of the infant.
In the Telegraph article of the day of completion for Claire - May 8 - there were still many staunch supporters, why, I don't know, when what she did was something many others would have been capable of, given the chance. This is hard to prove of course, because they didn't get that opportunity. It's what enables the middle classes to continue the pretence that they are more worthy than others, as suggested by the article in today's Telegraph (Privately educated MPs, actors and sports stars ... May 10, 2012).
Claire being a woman might have influenced readers and supporters even though they may not have been aware of that aspect of it. A comment I left today on the Telegraph's May 8th 'Paralysed Claire Lomas completes ... ' asks that question.
List of comments: Is this the bravest marathon athlete of all?
By the readers of Cole Moreton's article in Telegraph, Apr 28, 2012
http://samcpherson.homestead.com/files/Miscellaneous/2012_May_ListOfCommentsBraveryOfMarathon.doc
How Terry Fox changed Canada
Toronto Star
Apr 11, 2010
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/793452--how-terry-fox-changed-canada
Is this the bravest marathon athlete of all?
By Cole Moreton
Telegraph
Apr 28, 2012
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/london-marathon/9233873/Is-this-the-bravest-marathon-athlete-of-all.html
Additional articles and sites:
Alex T Smith
'Alex will walk again' website
Dec 2006 - present
http://alexwillwalkagain.com/2008/09/
Claire Squires Samaritans fundraising page raises more than £1m
By Patrick Butler and Helen Carter
guardian.co.uk
Apr 27, 2012
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/apr/27/claire-squires-samaritans-site-raises-1m?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487
Diving suit man Lloyd Scott denied London Marathon farewell
By Andy Dangerfield
Mar 22, 2012
BBC News, London
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-17465047
Give her a medal! Olympic hero issues plea over Claire's marathon effort
Leicester Mercury
May 04, 2012
http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/medal-Olympic-hero-issues-plea-Claire-s-marathon/story-16001121-detail/story.html
It's heartbreaking when Eddie's kids ring ... but can't understand him
By David Lowe
The Sun
Mar 4, 2009
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/woman/real_life/article2294572.ece
London Marathon: Thousands take part in 32nd race
BBC News
Apr 22, 2012
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-17785660
Nine days after the London Marathon finished, paralysed mother is still out there taking one step at a time... thanks to a £43,000 bionic suit
By Harry Mount
Daily Mail
May 1, 2012
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2137651/Awesome-courage-bionic-woman-Nine-days-race-finished-paralysed-mother-doing-London-marathon-heroic-step-time--thanks-43-000-space-age-suit.html
No race medal for London Marathon fund-raiser Claire Lomas
Merc_Reporter
Leicestershire Mercury
May 03, 2012
http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/race-medal-London-Marathon-fund-raiser-Claire/story-15992429-detail/story.html
Paralysed Claire Lomas completes London Marathon
Telegraph
May 8, 2012
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/london-marathon/9252205/Paralysed-Claire-Lomas-completes-London-Marathon.html#disqus_thread
Paralysed rider aims for London marathon with 'Wrong Trousers' robot legs
By Richard Gray, Science Correspondent
Telegraph
Feb 12, 2012
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/9076329/Paralysed-rider-aims-for-London-marathon-with-Wrong-Trousers-robot-legs.html
Paralyzed woman completes London Marathon wearing bionic suit
Emily Jackson Staff Reporter
Star online
May 8 2012
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1175081--paralyzed-woman-completes-london-marathon-wearing-bionic-suit?bn=1#article
Privately educated MPs, actors and sports stars dominate society, says Gove
Telegraph
May 10, 2012
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9257078/Privately-educated-MPs-actors-and-sports-stars-dominate-society-says-Gove.html
Richard Branson will give 'bionic' woman medal for London Marathon
BBC News
May 5, 2012
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-17967948
The article itself was biased to the extreme, and the comments were no better. I have not seen comments before - well maybe I have - that distorted the truth so astoundingly, without hesitance, with no apparent sense of integrity or need to say anything more except to pretend. The falsehoods that were being spoken were beyond belief, the absolute loyalty of most of the commenters (and as it turned out, the moderators as well) was appalling, though it has to be taken into consideration that they were coming at this from the persoective of the well-off in Britain.
There seemed to be no qualms at distorting the truth in an attempt to persuade readers to donate to Claire's cause - spinal research - and apparently to the cost of her robot suit and her pysiotherapist, 5 star hotels, etc, as well as continuing medical care that in most likelihood would never be available to anyone but the most popular people in the country.
One of the first questions I asked was whether Claire required a physiotherapist to stand behind her every step of the way, in her marathon attempt which should take about 2 or 3 weeks. The abrupt answer was Of course, as though it was not a subject to be discussed further and no more information need to be given out. I wasn't the only person to wonder about the sense of letting Claire do this, as what was obvious was that she was totally dependent on her physiotherapist, her medical team, her family, and all those who supported her "independence." Yes, did you catch that.
Is this what is now considered to be independence - walking in a $70,000 bionic suit, unable to travel alone, do many of the typical things a person does for oneself, unable to care for one's child, or cook meals for hubby, or many other things I haven't mentioned here. Yet, people in the article discussion were claiming just that - that Claire was independent.
How anyone can think that a person who comes to this mainly because she comes from money, has money, had a career, and is youthful and lovely to look at, can represent the idea of 'bravery' is beyond me. There are so many others out there - marathon participants included - who must have to struggle to walk, or get into their wheelchair, and have to deal with doing their daily tasks alone without help, with far less assistance from the medical community, than Claire has. I doubt that a day ever went by that she didn't know that she would be taken care of, would be given the best care that money could buy, the best treatment. Has she ever experienced doubt, that her family and friends - and the medical community - would care for her?
Even her marriage seems like something out of a fairy tale, not the kind of experience most women would have if they went on an online dating service, paralyzed from the chest down. How lucky would a girl have to be to attract a research scientist? Claire went on to marry her internet date, got pregnant, and had a child. But out of human interest, isn't it normal to be curious about how she cares for the child, or is it like the question about the physiotherapist. One should not ask such things.
It reminds me of the story, the Emperor with No Clothes, how everyone ignored the reality of the sitution and simply pretended, because they had to, because those with power said they should. And yet, I can't think of any situation so artificial, so pretentious, so unreal, so false, as this situation - this girl's life. Even our own Kate and William, who some may criticize because of their Royal connections, come across as real, as like us in so many ways. They walk and talk and work and look after the house and go on trips. They are independent, in mind and body, and in the way they live their lives.
This new tale brings the story of the Emperor up-to-date, as it is based on techonology, re-invention, the concept of relativity (there is no one truth, it's all perspective), and, I would add, the idea that a young woman can do it all, and have it all - the marriage and children, a home, earning a living, participating athletically, contributing meaningfully, etc. So if a slight distortion of the truth surrounding the facts of the situation is required in order that the masses believe in Claire and her life, and that it really does relate to our own, well so be it.
I don't like to think of people donating to her cause because they have been encouraged to see her as someone special - as independent, giving her all to a cause which will supposedly help all spinal injuries sufferers, because the truth is, in any medical innovation or expensive treatment, it's not the ordinary person who benefits. It's ordinary people who often give from their meagre resources, looking up to someone whose image is being projected as saintlike, determined, brave to the extreme, but the reality is that it is more likely to be the unheralded ordinary person who shows bravery, suffering in silence and without the steady support from family, community and the medical system, as they particpate in the marathon, or just try to survive, from day to day.
To me, newpapers are places where one reads the news and gets to hear the well-informed opinions of journalists and others, not a place to provide support, and persuade readers to give money, for a cause which is suspect in the first place in its integrity, worth, and usefulness. I hold the author of the article, Cole Moreton, responsible for instigating such a farce, and the ready and willing supporters in the comments section of the article for their narrow-mindedness and general bad attitude towards anyone who questioned the worth of supporting Claire's cause and the statements that were being said about her.
On one level, I pondered the question of how many people would benefit from additional funds put into money for spinal research, and how many patients would actually be able to walk afterwards due to the inspiration of Clair Lomas. I wonder how many other patients would have welcomed the opportunity to try out the bionic legs and participate in the marathon, and how many are simply left to watch from their beds.
On another level, I questioned the idea of 'progress' itself, commenting that
"It always feels good to 'progress,' even though we know that progress isn't always the best route to take. I know, I'm not perfect either. I had virtually abandoned old posts on my blog, Sue's Views on the News, in favour of writing on new and current topics. Having to maintain the old, update the links, etc, is never as inspiring or as much fun. But underneath it all, it is as important as writing new posts. It is the foundation on which we build - our blog, or in the case of healthcare, our country. Letting the old drop away, mistreated, without attention, is not the sign of a healthy society.
There's a fine line between stagnation and progress, one being too much remaining stuck in present circumstances, the other being too intent on moving forward, continuously. We already know how badly our health systems are suffering, financially, with physiotherapists, doctors, and adequate health care not available to all people equally. So why heap so much on this one girl, and this single health condition, to benefit the ones who can afford it, when people all over the 'civilized' world are suffering." End of comment
I encourage readers to read the Comments section of the article 'Is this the bravest,' which I saved in a separate document (see below) as I came to realize that comments were being interfered with by the moderators. Also in the comments section of that article I mention Terry Fox, the one-legged Canadian whose determination, with virtually no financial backing, took on the task of crossing Canada to raise money for cancer research, until the cancer took his life a few months later, at age 22. He was just an ordinary person, a true sportsman, back then in 1980 when he ran his Marathon of Hope.
Added May 5, 2012
It look as though even more posts have been tampered with, in the comments section following the Cole Moreton article. Personal comments made about me, to me, by some of the commenters, have been removed. Many of my comments have been labeled ‘edited’ although most haven’t been changed, just the ones that say things they don’t want to hear, about class, mainly, meaning money.
See ‘Richard Branson’ for the latest on the medal controversy. He and the Virgin group will be honouring Claire with a trophy for her effort.
This is Eddie Kidd’s website: http://www.eddiekidd.com/#/home/4548358397 . He was a stunt rider injured in a motorcycle show who received brain injuries as well as damaging his spinal cord (mentioned by a commenter in the Leicester Mercury).
For those interested in more stories of determination, see the website of marine engineer Alex T Smith, at http://alexwillwalkagain.com/2008/09/ , for his story of spinal injury, his successes in rehabilitation, and the continuing struggle for the treatment he needs.
Hairdresser Claire Squires (see Claire Squires Samaritans) pushed herself beyond the limits of normal endurance, as so many do while running the marathon; sadly, she lost her life before reaching the finishing line, resulting in an outpouring of grief and generosity.
Added May 10, 2012
In the newspaper's comments in the Apr 28 Telegraph article, 'Is this the bravest...', the subject of independence had come up. Claire was described as independent, despite surely having almost every aspect of her life dependent on the good will of others (or money paid, since selflessness is not a desirable trait, according to some readers). I doubt that she cooked or cleaned, or drove a car. She was followed at every step of the marathon by her physiotherapist, although I noticed by the end of the walk news article were saying it was her husband who walked behind her. She married and had a child some time after the accident, but I don't see how it would have been possible for her to help with the practical care of the infant.
In the Telegraph article of the day of completion for Claire - May 8 - there were still many staunch supporters, why, I don't know, when what she did was something many others would have been capable of, given the chance. This is hard to prove of course, because they didn't get that opportunity. It's what enables the middle classes to continue the pretence that they are more worthy than others, as suggested by the article in today's Telegraph (Privately educated MPs, actors and sports stars ... May 10, 2012).
Claire being a woman might have influenced readers and supporters even though they may not have been aware of that aspect of it. A comment I left today on the Telegraph's May 8th 'Paralysed Claire Lomas completes ... ' asks that question.
List of comments: Is this the bravest marathon athlete of all?
By the readers of Cole Moreton's article in Telegraph, Apr 28, 2012
http://samcpherson.homestead.com/files/Miscellaneous/2012_May_ListOfCommentsBraveryOfMarathon.doc
How Terry Fox changed Canada
Toronto Star
Apr 11, 2010
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/793452--how-terry-fox-changed-canada
Is this the bravest marathon athlete of all?
By Cole Moreton
Telegraph
Apr 28, 2012
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/london-marathon/9233873/Is-this-the-bravest-marathon-athlete-of-all.html
Additional articles and sites:
Alex T Smith
'Alex will walk again' website
Dec 2006 - present
http://alexwillwalkagain.com/2008/09/
Claire Squires Samaritans fundraising page raises more than £1m
By Patrick Butler and Helen Carter
guardian.co.uk
Apr 27, 2012
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/apr/27/claire-squires-samaritans-site-raises-1m?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487
Diving suit man Lloyd Scott denied London Marathon farewell
By Andy Dangerfield
Mar 22, 2012
BBC News, London
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-17465047
Give her a medal! Olympic hero issues plea over Claire's marathon effort
Leicester Mercury
May 04, 2012
http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/medal-Olympic-hero-issues-plea-Claire-s-marathon/story-16001121-detail/story.html
It's heartbreaking when Eddie's kids ring ... but can't understand him
By David Lowe
The Sun
Mar 4, 2009
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/woman/real_life/article2294572.ece
London Marathon: Thousands take part in 32nd race
BBC News
Apr 22, 2012
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-17785660
Nine days after the London Marathon finished, paralysed mother is still out there taking one step at a time... thanks to a £43,000 bionic suit
By Harry Mount
Daily Mail
May 1, 2012
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2137651/Awesome-courage-bionic-woman-Nine-days-race-finished-paralysed-mother-doing-London-marathon-heroic-step-time--thanks-43-000-space-age-suit.html
No race medal for London Marathon fund-raiser Claire Lomas
Merc_Reporter
Leicestershire Mercury
May 03, 2012
http://www.thisisleicestershire.co.uk/race-medal-London-Marathon-fund-raiser-Claire/story-15992429-detail/story.html
Paralysed Claire Lomas completes London Marathon
Telegraph
May 8, 2012
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athletics/london-marathon/9252205/Paralysed-Claire-Lomas-completes-London-Marathon.html#disqus_thread
Paralysed rider aims for London marathon with 'Wrong Trousers' robot legs
By Richard Gray, Science Correspondent
Telegraph
Feb 12, 2012
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/9076329/Paralysed-rider-aims-for-London-marathon-with-Wrong-Trousers-robot-legs.html
Paralyzed woman completes London Marathon wearing bionic suit
Emily Jackson Staff Reporter
Star online
May 8 2012
http://www.thestar.com/news/world/article/1175081--paralyzed-woman-completes-london-marathon-wearing-bionic-suit?bn=1#article
Privately educated MPs, actors and sports stars dominate society, says Gove
Telegraph
May 10, 2012
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9257078/Privately-educated-MPs-actors-and-sports-stars-dominate-society-says-Gove.html
Richard Branson will give 'bionic' woman medal for London Marathon
BBC News
May 5, 2012
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-17967948
9 April, 2012
Baby boomers, longevity, and health care
Life expectancy is going up, as better health care and technological advancements enable that to happen. The baby boomers are often blamed for rising health care costs, though even within the population of over 65s there seem to be different perceptions. It's not a subject that gets discussed in great detail. I imagine that those who are receiving great health care aren't going to share their secrets with those who don't.
One article I saw in the local newspaper briefly alluded to the cost of healthcare. Moorsel wrote that "the key talking points for taxpayers should be what share of total spending they think health care should consume and what other things--from education to social services-- they're prepared to see squeezed out by that cost and by how much." As it happens, the controversy about the extra $10 billion the F35s were going to cost came along at about the same time as this article (see MPs battle, 2012). Not being an expert on actual health costs, I responded in my own way, since discussion on health care seems to me to come along infrequently and such an opportunity should not be passed by. So I responded by taking the subject in a different direction, to one about *class* and *entitlement,* writing within the limiting word limit, as follows:
"A key point of discussion should be people's sense of entitlement to health care, as this is partly responsible for the rising cost, or as GVM (the author, Greg Moorsel) says, taxpayers say "they've paid into the system and expect to get it back." This kind of thinking is based on the false logic that working people pay taxes and thus are better citizens than those who don't.
In today's world (but also when women were homemakers), we have young people unemployed (thus not paying taxes) while increasingly more women team up with men in their dual-income families. And do they see themselves as entitled to more & better care than non-taxpayers? Read 'Men at work' . http://suemcpherson.blogspot.ca/2012/03/men-at-work-what-does-future-hold.html ." End
The Macleans article, from a month ago, was excellent at approaching the subject in a different manner, acknowledging that older people often bear the brunt of accusations of overusing the healthcare system. In reality, Belluz claims, every age group of the population is spending more on health care. What they don't say is that the ones who are spending the most probably are the middle classes - in whichever age group they belong.
In the piece about baby boomers "reinventing old age," wealth doesn't come into it, the author, Dr Alexandre Kalache, apparently assuming that all baby boomers are well off. What was good about it was the discussion, which included several different strands, some very positive, some more realistic about growing old in today's world. Even the 'Age Friendly' project, to do with making our cities - in this case London - a better place for its older citizens, came under fire in the Comments section, mainly for its intention to build the network using for its model the one they are familiar with - Children and Youth services. I'm sure Dr Kalache would be appalled to know that the Child/Youth Services model was the one being proposed here in London, and furthemore, that it was not being discussed with the older people attending the Task Force meeting, thus not enabling the baby boomers to reinvent themselves. The concept seemed to be simply slipped in, under the communications section, instead of being brought out into the open.
I have referred back to an earlier blog entry I wrote in 2010 (Survey: can Canadian baby-boomers survive our health-care system) written from the perspective of having what I consider to be inadequate treatment for an injury which affects me every day, in everything I do. See http://samcpherson.homestead.com/StoryofMyLife.html . Sometimes, it takes so little to make a difference to a person's life - a small surgical procedure, like pins, but I didn't have the option. Although I had an appointment to see the Orthopedic surgeon a few hours afterwards, on the advice of the Dr in Emerg, he made his decision based only on the xray.
Healthcare: Technology is a bigger cost driver than demography
By Julia Belluz
Macleans
February 10, 2012
http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/02/10/healthcare-technology-is-a-bigger-cost-driver-than-demography/
Health costs never get clear debate
By Greg Van Moorsel, QMI Agency
London Free Press, Comment
April 3, 2012
http://www.lfpress.com/comment/2012/04/03/19586546.html
How the Baby Boomers Are Reinventing Old Age
By Dr. Alexandre Kalache
Huffington Post, The Blog
April 4, 2012
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-alexandre-kalache/how-the-baby-boomers-are-_b_1403431.html?ref=world&ir=World
MPs battle over F-35 fighter jet costs
By Laura Payton
CBC News
Apr 4, 2012
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/04/04/pol-f35-fallout.html
Survey: can Canadian baby-boomers survive our health-care system?
By Sue McPherson
Sue's Views on the News
Aug 23, 2010
http://suemcpherson.blogspot.com/2010/08/survey-can-canadian-baby-boomers.html
One article I saw in the local newspaper briefly alluded to the cost of healthcare. Moorsel wrote that "the key talking points for taxpayers should be what share of total spending they think health care should consume and what other things--from education to social services-- they're prepared to see squeezed out by that cost and by how much." As it happens, the controversy about the extra $10 billion the F35s were going to cost came along at about the same time as this article (see MPs battle, 2012). Not being an expert on actual health costs, I responded in my own way, since discussion on health care seems to me to come along infrequently and such an opportunity should not be passed by. So I responded by taking the subject in a different direction, to one about *class* and *entitlement,* writing within the limiting word limit, as follows:
"A key point of discussion should be people's sense of entitlement to health care, as this is partly responsible for the rising cost, or as GVM (the author, Greg Moorsel) says, taxpayers say "they've paid into the system and expect to get it back." This kind of thinking is based on the false logic that working people pay taxes and thus are better citizens than those who don't.
In today's world (but also when women were homemakers), we have young people unemployed (thus not paying taxes) while increasingly more women team up with men in their dual-income families. And do they see themselves as entitled to more & better care than non-taxpayers? Read 'Men at work' . http://suemcpherson.blogspot.ca/2012/03/men-at-work-what-does-future-hold.html ." End
The Macleans article, from a month ago, was excellent at approaching the subject in a different manner, acknowledging that older people often bear the brunt of accusations of overusing the healthcare system. In reality, Belluz claims, every age group of the population is spending more on health care. What they don't say is that the ones who are spending the most probably are the middle classes - in whichever age group they belong.
In the piece about baby boomers "reinventing old age," wealth doesn't come into it, the author, Dr Alexandre Kalache, apparently assuming that all baby boomers are well off. What was good about it was the discussion, which included several different strands, some very positive, some more realistic about growing old in today's world. Even the 'Age Friendly' project, to do with making our cities - in this case London - a better place for its older citizens, came under fire in the Comments section, mainly for its intention to build the network using for its model the one they are familiar with - Children and Youth services. I'm sure Dr Kalache would be appalled to know that the Child/Youth Services model was the one being proposed here in London, and furthemore, that it was not being discussed with the older people attending the Task Force meeting, thus not enabling the baby boomers to reinvent themselves. The concept seemed to be simply slipped in, under the communications section, instead of being brought out into the open.
I have referred back to an earlier blog entry I wrote in 2010 (Survey: can Canadian baby-boomers survive our health-care system) written from the perspective of having what I consider to be inadequate treatment for an injury which affects me every day, in everything I do. See http://samcpherson.homestead.com/StoryofMyLife.html . Sometimes, it takes so little to make a difference to a person's life - a small surgical procedure, like pins, but I didn't have the option. Although I had an appointment to see the Orthopedic surgeon a few hours afterwards, on the advice of the Dr in Emerg, he made his decision based only on the xray.
Healthcare: Technology is a bigger cost driver than demography
By Julia Belluz
Macleans
February 10, 2012
http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/02/10/healthcare-technology-is-a-bigger-cost-driver-than-demography/
Health costs never get clear debate
By Greg Van Moorsel, QMI Agency
London Free Press, Comment
April 3, 2012
http://www.lfpress.com/comment/2012/04/03/19586546.html
How the Baby Boomers Are Reinventing Old Age
By Dr. Alexandre Kalache
Huffington Post, The Blog
April 4, 2012
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dr-alexandre-kalache/how-the-baby-boomers-are-_b_1403431.html?ref=world&ir=World
MPs battle over F-35 fighter jet costs
By Laura Payton
CBC News
Apr 4, 2012
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/04/04/pol-f35-fallout.html
Survey: can Canadian baby-boomers survive our health-care system?
By Sue McPherson
Sue's Views on the News
Aug 23, 2010
http://suemcpherson.blogspot.com/2010/08/survey-can-canadian-baby-boomers.html
2 April, 2012
Contraception and working women
What is Stephanie Pappas trying to say, in this bit about new research on an old topic - women and work? Too much left unspoken, not enough information on the study itself or on her own views, to make this anything but political manipulation on behalf of women's quest to have the pill paid for.
The longitudinal study undertaken by Martha Bailey and associates started in 1968 and continued throughout the 1990s, its participants having being born within a few years of the year I was (1946). Prior to the 60s, when no such pill was available, they suggest, women had to choose between either a career or marriage. Without the pill, they are suggesting, the risk of pregnancy was too great for women with partners to risk having a career.
But as time went on, the researchers claim, "With oral contraceptives, women no longer had to choose between investing in their careers and investing in a mate." As the pill became available in their area, more women would choose college and career as well as marriage.
I'm not sure about the logic behind these ideas, or how they relate to the experience of that cohort of women and this one today. When I read it, it seems to me that women researchers of today are interpreting the experience of twenty-year-olds in the 1960s according to their own model, instead of looking at it through the lens of society at the time. I'm not sure that many women back then looked at the world in terms of *choice,* a favourite word and key theme among liberal feminists and women in general today, but surely, not back then. Furthermore, the whole idea of the battle for 'the pill,' was one of women's right to use it, not as it has now become, the fight for the right to have someone else pay for it. "The pill’s availability likely altered norms and expectations about marriage and childbearing," Bailey has said. And work. And sex. There is a great deal that has been left unsaid, in the brief write-up here, and likely in the research itself, related to women's newfound personal freedom related to sexuality, both within and outside of marriage.
As discussed in the Comments section of this brief piece of news, there was something else going on at more or less the same time that the pill was being introduced into society (possibly through the efforts of radical feminists). Women in general were being encouraged to take their place alongside men in the workplace, in the quest for 'equality, as expounded by liberal feminists'. The influence of this latter ideology and women's movement was not mentioned in the article about women's wages and the pill, but it was a widespread effort by women, begun in the years after women in droves were sent back to the kitchen, so to speak, by men after they returned from the war in the early 40s. During the war, women had discovered how well they could do the work men did, in factories, farm fields, and many other areas that had traditionally been 'men's work,' and how much they enjoyed it, and enjoyed the independence and money. But after the war ended, they were no longer needed.
A second major factor of this subject of contraception and work is its connection to the debate about insurance coverage of contraception, for working women and college students, mainly (as I have seen in the news) and lastly, among women living in poverty. Many comments ensued from this awareness, on Comments online. I found it odd that some readers would suggest that if the insurance wouldn't pay for the pill for contraceptive purposes, that the working woman would stubbornly continue to have unprotected sex and risk pregnancy rather than pay for it out of her wages. This issue is not only a mattter of concern to women who are employed, and should be addressed as a concern for all women. Otherwise, some women will lose out, through inability to pay, and will be at risk.
The third major item in this piece is the news that, of the one-third increase in wages among women, two-thirds came from greater workplace experience, and more importantly for what I am to say next, one-third of the increase was a result of "women gaining more education and from choosing more lucrative, traditionally male, fields." In response to that, I can say that there is so much left out, so much more to discuss than how well women are doing at work. If women are taking the places that had traditionally been reserved for men, then what do you suppose all the men are doing, who are perfectly capable of doing the job?
If you haven't heard of the Occupy movement, then I suggest you open up your mind to what's going on in society. And if you are ready to seek solutions to the inquality brought about by feminism, then read my blog (see relevant entries below). Not only do we need to turn towards a society where there is more acceptance of one another's abilities, but within relationships also. Rather than the middle class, educated female joining forces with the middle class male she considers as being in her class (based on money and access to resources), forming what we now have a glut of - the dual-career, dual-income family - we need a variety of approaches to making up the workforce and the families within society. The problem is, it's the influential dual career couples who hold the power to make change, and who can at times seem to be the most reluctant to change.
Birth-Control Pill Helped Boost Women's Wages, New Study Shows
By Stephanie Pappas, LiveScience
Huffington Post
Mar 29, 2012
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/29/birth-control-pill-womens-wages-pay_n_1388064.html?ref=daily-brief?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=033012&utm_medium=email&utm_content=NewsEntry&utm_term=Daily%20Brief
The Economic Impact of the Pill
By Annie Lowrey
NY Times
March 6, 2012
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/the-economic-impact-of-the-pill/
Feminism's legacy: contributing towards social inequality
By Sue McPherson
Sue's Views on the News
5 February, 2012
http://suemcpherson.blogspot.com/2012/02/feminisms-legacy-contributing-towards.html
Men at work: what does the future hold?
By Sue McPherson
Sue's Views on the News
March 18, 2012
http://suemcpherson.blogspot.ca/2012/03/men-at-work-what-does-future-hold.html
The Occupy Movement: UWO's Klatt and Hammond, and other perspectives
By Sue McPherson
Sue's Views on the News
Dec 10, 2011
http://suemcpherson.blogspot.com/2011/12/occupy-movement-uwos-klatt-and-hammond.html
What Justin Bieber and Gold Diggers Can Teach Us About Feminism
By Sue McPherson
Sue's Views on the News
Nov 19, 2011
http://suemcpherson.blogspot.com/2011/11/what-justin-bieber-and-feminism-can.html
The longitudinal study undertaken by Martha Bailey and associates started in 1968 and continued throughout the 1990s, its participants having being born within a few years of the year I was (1946). Prior to the 60s, when no such pill was available, they suggest, women had to choose between either a career or marriage. Without the pill, they are suggesting, the risk of pregnancy was too great for women with partners to risk having a career.
But as time went on, the researchers claim, "With oral contraceptives, women no longer had to choose between investing in their careers and investing in a mate." As the pill became available in their area, more women would choose college and career as well as marriage.
I'm not sure about the logic behind these ideas, or how they relate to the experience of that cohort of women and this one today. When I read it, it seems to me that women researchers of today are interpreting the experience of twenty-year-olds in the 1960s according to their own model, instead of looking at it through the lens of society at the time. I'm not sure that many women back then looked at the world in terms of *choice,* a favourite word and key theme among liberal feminists and women in general today, but surely, not back then. Furthermore, the whole idea of the battle for 'the pill,' was one of women's right to use it, not as it has now become, the fight for the right to have someone else pay for it. "The pill’s availability likely altered norms and expectations about marriage and childbearing," Bailey has said. And work. And sex. There is a great deal that has been left unsaid, in the brief write-up here, and likely in the research itself, related to women's newfound personal freedom related to sexuality, both within and outside of marriage.
As discussed in the Comments section of this brief piece of news, there was something else going on at more or less the same time that the pill was being introduced into society (possibly through the efforts of radical feminists). Women in general were being encouraged to take their place alongside men in the workplace, in the quest for 'equality, as expounded by liberal feminists'. The influence of this latter ideology and women's movement was not mentioned in the article about women's wages and the pill, but it was a widespread effort by women, begun in the years after women in droves were sent back to the kitchen, so to speak, by men after they returned from the war in the early 40s. During the war, women had discovered how well they could do the work men did, in factories, farm fields, and many other areas that had traditionally been 'men's work,' and how much they enjoyed it, and enjoyed the independence and money. But after the war ended, they were no longer needed.
A second major factor of this subject of contraception and work is its connection to the debate about insurance coverage of contraception, for working women and college students, mainly (as I have seen in the news) and lastly, among women living in poverty. Many comments ensued from this awareness, on Comments online. I found it odd that some readers would suggest that if the insurance wouldn't pay for the pill for contraceptive purposes, that the working woman would stubbornly continue to have unprotected sex and risk pregnancy rather than pay for it out of her wages. This issue is not only a mattter of concern to women who are employed, and should be addressed as a concern for all women. Otherwise, some women will lose out, through inability to pay, and will be at risk.
The third major item in this piece is the news that, of the one-third increase in wages among women, two-thirds came from greater workplace experience, and more importantly for what I am to say next, one-third of the increase was a result of "women gaining more education and from choosing more lucrative, traditionally male, fields." In response to that, I can say that there is so much left out, so much more to discuss than how well women are doing at work. If women are taking the places that had traditionally been reserved for men, then what do you suppose all the men are doing, who are perfectly capable of doing the job?
If you haven't heard of the Occupy movement, then I suggest you open up your mind to what's going on in society. And if you are ready to seek solutions to the inquality brought about by feminism, then read my blog (see relevant entries below). Not only do we need to turn towards a society where there is more acceptance of one another's abilities, but within relationships also. Rather than the middle class, educated female joining forces with the middle class male she considers as being in her class (based on money and access to resources), forming what we now have a glut of - the dual-career, dual-income family - we need a variety of approaches to making up the workforce and the families within society. The problem is, it's the influential dual career couples who hold the power to make change, and who can at times seem to be the most reluctant to change.
Birth-Control Pill Helped Boost Women's Wages, New Study Shows
By Stephanie Pappas, LiveScience
Huffington Post
Mar 29, 2012
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/29/birth-control-pill-womens-wages-pay_n_1388064.html?ref=daily-brief?utm_source=DailyBrief&utm_campaign=033012&utm_medium=email&utm_content=NewsEntry&utm_term=Daily%20Brief
The Economic Impact of the Pill
By Annie Lowrey
NY Times
March 6, 2012
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/the-economic-impact-of-the-pill/
Feminism's legacy: contributing towards social inequality
By Sue McPherson
Sue's Views on the News
5 February, 2012
http://suemcpherson.blogspot.com/2012/02/feminisms-legacy-contributing-towards.html
Men at work: what does the future hold?
By Sue McPherson
Sue's Views on the News
March 18, 2012
http://suemcpherson.blogspot.ca/2012/03/men-at-work-what-does-future-hold.html
The Occupy Movement: UWO's Klatt and Hammond, and other perspectives
By Sue McPherson
Sue's Views on the News
Dec 10, 2011
http://suemcpherson.blogspot.com/2011/12/occupy-movement-uwos-klatt-and-hammond.html
What Justin Bieber and Gold Diggers Can Teach Us About Feminism
By Sue McPherson
Sue's Views on the News
Nov 19, 2011
http://suemcpherson.blogspot.com/2011/11/what-justin-bieber-and-feminism-can.html
18 March, 2012
Men at work: what does the future hold?
The reality of Canadian society today is that there aren't enough decent jobs to go around. What can we expect - riots, sit-ins, Occupiers camping in the park? Another reality, related to the first, is that more men are staying home to take care of the kids while women focus on their careers. Thus gender roles are sometimes becoming blurred, as men and women attempt to put their lives together in ways that accomplish what needs to be done - with a few exceptions of course, mostly among those who have more choices in life.
Imagine a world in which some men stay home to take care of the children, and where women too, can do the caring work, without being made to feel less of a person. Some families are already doing it, in what can be called role reversal, alternative ways of handling the parenting and housework, or the blurring of gender roles. The traditional model of parenting and engaging in paid work no longer suits our society, and hasn't for quite a while. Yet society has had a hard time catching up with reality. The flexibility and cooperation needed to carry this off successfully is the challenge to be met.
The influence of feminism has resulted in many dual-career families, some of whom must be quite well off, as one professional married to another. On the other side, couples and singletons in less well-off curcumstances end up having to manage with less, or even struggling for their survival, as fewer jobs and careers remain open to them.
From news articles and blogs, and comments on these in online newspapers, it is plain to see that not everyone recognizes that there is a problem within society. But it is there for anyone to view, if they are ready to take the blinders off. I have included links to three pieces here from online newpapers, that discuss current dilemmas within the modern family and how that ties in with paid work. The key theme is gender, as men and women seek ways to pursue their own interests and desires, hopefully but not always without subordinating or diminishing the other, or others who have different aims.
Women have always tried to find ways of subverting the traditional female gender role, as they discovered that being a housewife and stay-at-home mother was not as fulfilling or often not as respected a role as working for pay outside the home. In fact, a research essay that I wrote several years ago now, was on this subject. It was about my grandmother, in the early 20th century, complete with gender-bending and containing references to other tactics she used to pass on her views on relationships and work, and to let us know how she felt about it all (see Gertrude McPherson and the Grey Cottage).
In society today, women work at the same kind of careers men have, earning almost as much, so they say. So much is taken for granted, as women now have the right to do these jobs, whereas in the not-so-distant past, they didn't have that right. What these women don't seem to recognize is that many of them are now in privileged positions, just as men used to be, making decisions for the family and sometimes not seeing that just as men used to perceive themselves to be superior to women and some men, they are doing it also - by virtue of the fact they have a good job and are earning a living. Certainly, this buys them respect from others, in a way that caring for home and children often does not. It gives them - career women - the freedom to be independent financially, again, in ways most women of earlier eras could not hope to be.
It's one thing for couples, or members of the middle classes, to help one another attain their goals, but what we need is more recognition of the needs of the younger generation who don't have a secure future to look forward to. As can be seen in the article, 'Graduating into a job market that isn't there,' the plight of young people today is not looking all that secure. In one of the articles listed below, (My hubby does housework), comments covered the spectrum from one extreme to the other, from insulting to acceptance and gratitude for men's accommodating role in the home. 'Women as the breadwinners' provided the opportunity for readers to comment once more on how they saw the situation of women earning more than men, again, through a wide variety of responses.
Could it be possible that the riot and vandalism in London, Ontario just last night ('Hooligans and Idiots'), marking not just St Patrick's Day but the end of March Break and the return to college, was a reflection of the disillusionment of youth. One woman whose home neighboured on the site of the riot said that the vandals were singing O Canada as they watched the CTV news vehicle go up in flames, while others heaped fencing and other materials onto the fire. Was it partly the warm temperatures that led to this event? Was it an accumulative process starting several years ago in this area of the city, always on St Patrick's day? Did the Occupy Movement last summer contribute to social unrest. Could social media have one of the culprits, firing up particpants, as mentioned in reports? Or was it just coincincidence, all these factors contributing to a lesser or greater degree to the riot that ensued. From pictures shown the day after, it appeared to be mainly males - youthful males, in attendance, although the first video offered up by the London Free Press showed the image of a young woman dancing across in front of the flames, her image a shadow figure against the flames (see 'Fleming Drive in flames'). The police, of course, are more concerned with the damage done, the lawbreakers, and the image of London that has been broadcast to the nation (see Chief Duncan's statement).
If it can be recognized and acknowledged that feminism has played a large part in the widening of the gap between rich and poor, there might be the possibility of beneficial changes within society, in personal relationships as well as in the workplace - not to mention in the streets and parks. Putting people down because they are poor or because they don't fit the traditional patriarchal model of work (held in today's world by either a male or a female), or are unemployed, isn't going to improve society for most people, and it may actually lead to more harm done to individuals and to society.
Chief Duncan's statement
By London Chief of Police Brad Duncan
March 18, 2012
London Free Press
http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2012/03/18/19518106.html
Fleming Drive in flames (video)
By Scott Taylor
The London Free Press
March 18, 2012
http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2012/03/18/19517661.html
Gertrude McPherson and the Grey Cottage: an interdisciplinary, biographical approach to life cycle development
By Sue McPherson
S A McPherson website
2001
http://samcpherson.homestead.com/files/EssaysandWriting/GMcPhersonGryCttgLifeCycleSMcPherson.doc
Graduating into a job market that isn’t there
By Gary Mason, Columnist
Globe and Mail
Mar 15, 2012
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/gary_mason/graduating-into-a-job-market-that-isnt-there/article2369414/
Comments: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/gary_mason/graduating-into-a-job-market-that-isnt-there/article2369414/comments/
'Hooligans and idiots'
By Scott Taylor
London Free Press
March 18, 2012
http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2012/03/18/19518906.html
My hubby does housework but only works part-time. Is that fair?
By Zarqa Nawaz
Globe and Mail, Relationships
Mar 15, 2012
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/relationship-advice/zarqa-nawaz/my-hubby-does-housework-but-only-works-part-time-is-that-fair/article2370518/
Comments: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/relationship-advice/zarqa-nawaz/my-hubby-does-housework-but-only-works-part-time-is-that-fair/article2370518/comments/
Women as the breadwinners: Turning the traditional model of gender roles in marriage on its head
By Sarah Boesveld
National Post News
Feb 25, 2012
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/25/womean-as-the-breadwinners-turning-the-traditional-model-of-gender-roles-in-marriage-on-its-head/
Imagine a world in which some men stay home to take care of the children, and where women too, can do the caring work, without being made to feel less of a person. Some families are already doing it, in what can be called role reversal, alternative ways of handling the parenting and housework, or the blurring of gender roles. The traditional model of parenting and engaging in paid work no longer suits our society, and hasn't for quite a while. Yet society has had a hard time catching up with reality. The flexibility and cooperation needed to carry this off successfully is the challenge to be met.
The influence of feminism has resulted in many dual-career families, some of whom must be quite well off, as one professional married to another. On the other side, couples and singletons in less well-off curcumstances end up having to manage with less, or even struggling for their survival, as fewer jobs and careers remain open to them.
From news articles and blogs, and comments on these in online newspapers, it is plain to see that not everyone recognizes that there is a problem within society. But it is there for anyone to view, if they are ready to take the blinders off. I have included links to three pieces here from online newpapers, that discuss current dilemmas within the modern family and how that ties in with paid work. The key theme is gender, as men and women seek ways to pursue their own interests and desires, hopefully but not always without subordinating or diminishing the other, or others who have different aims.
Women have always tried to find ways of subverting the traditional female gender role, as they discovered that being a housewife and stay-at-home mother was not as fulfilling or often not as respected a role as working for pay outside the home. In fact, a research essay that I wrote several years ago now, was on this subject. It was about my grandmother, in the early 20th century, complete with gender-bending and containing references to other tactics she used to pass on her views on relationships and work, and to let us know how she felt about it all (see Gertrude McPherson and the Grey Cottage).
In society today, women work at the same kind of careers men have, earning almost as much, so they say. So much is taken for granted, as women now have the right to do these jobs, whereas in the not-so-distant past, they didn't have that right. What these women don't seem to recognize is that many of them are now in privileged positions, just as men used to be, making decisions for the family and sometimes not seeing that just as men used to perceive themselves to be superior to women and some men, they are doing it also - by virtue of the fact they have a good job and are earning a living. Certainly, this buys them respect from others, in a way that caring for home and children often does not. It gives them - career women - the freedom to be independent financially, again, in ways most women of earlier eras could not hope to be.
It's one thing for couples, or members of the middle classes, to help one another attain their goals, but what we need is more recognition of the needs of the younger generation who don't have a secure future to look forward to. As can be seen in the article, 'Graduating into a job market that isn't there,' the plight of young people today is not looking all that secure. In one of the articles listed below, (My hubby does housework), comments covered the spectrum from one extreme to the other, from insulting to acceptance and gratitude for men's accommodating role in the home. 'Women as the breadwinners' provided the opportunity for readers to comment once more on how they saw the situation of women earning more than men, again, through a wide variety of responses.
Could it be possible that the riot and vandalism in London, Ontario just last night ('Hooligans and Idiots'), marking not just St Patrick's Day but the end of March Break and the return to college, was a reflection of the disillusionment of youth. One woman whose home neighboured on the site of the riot said that the vandals were singing O Canada as they watched the CTV news vehicle go up in flames, while others heaped fencing and other materials onto the fire. Was it partly the warm temperatures that led to this event? Was it an accumulative process starting several years ago in this area of the city, always on St Patrick's day? Did the Occupy Movement last summer contribute to social unrest. Could social media have one of the culprits, firing up particpants, as mentioned in reports? Or was it just coincincidence, all these factors contributing to a lesser or greater degree to the riot that ensued. From pictures shown the day after, it appeared to be mainly males - youthful males, in attendance, although the first video offered up by the London Free Press showed the image of a young woman dancing across in front of the flames, her image a shadow figure against the flames (see 'Fleming Drive in flames'). The police, of course, are more concerned with the damage done, the lawbreakers, and the image of London that has been broadcast to the nation (see Chief Duncan's statement).
If it can be recognized and acknowledged that feminism has played a large part in the widening of the gap between rich and poor, there might be the possibility of beneficial changes within society, in personal relationships as well as in the workplace - not to mention in the streets and parks. Putting people down because they are poor or because they don't fit the traditional patriarchal model of work (held in today's world by either a male or a female), or are unemployed, isn't going to improve society for most people, and it may actually lead to more harm done to individuals and to society.
Chief Duncan's statement
By London Chief of Police Brad Duncan
March 18, 2012
London Free Press
http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2012/03/18/19518106.html
Fleming Drive in flames (video)
By Scott Taylor
The London Free Press
March 18, 2012
http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2012/03/18/19517661.html
Gertrude McPherson and the Grey Cottage: an interdisciplinary, biographical approach to life cycle development
By Sue McPherson
S A McPherson website
2001
http://samcpherson.homestead.com/files/EssaysandWriting/GMcPhersonGryCttgLifeCycleSMcPherson.doc
Graduating into a job market that isn’t there
By Gary Mason, Columnist
Globe and Mail
Mar 15, 2012
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/gary_mason/graduating-into-a-job-market-that-isnt-there/article2369414/
Comments: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/gary_mason/graduating-into-a-job-market-that-isnt-there/article2369414/comments/
'Hooligans and idiots'
By Scott Taylor
London Free Press
March 18, 2012
http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2012/03/18/19518906.html
My hubby does housework but only works part-time. Is that fair?
By Zarqa Nawaz
Globe and Mail, Relationships
Mar 15, 2012
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/relationship-advice/zarqa-nawaz/my-hubby-does-housework-but-only-works-part-time-is-that-fair/article2370518/
Comments: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/relationships/relationship-advice/zarqa-nawaz/my-hubby-does-housework-but-only-works-part-time-is-that-fair/article2370518/comments/
Women as the breadwinners: Turning the traditional model of gender roles in marriage on its head
By Sarah Boesveld
National Post News
Feb 25, 2012
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/02/25/womean-as-the-breadwinners-turning-the-traditional-model-of-gender-roles-in-marriage-on-its-head/
6 March, 2012
The decriminalization of prostitution: two women talking
Susan Davis, a Vancouver, BC, activist working for the rights of prostitutes, and me, Sue McPherson, from London, Ontario, not so keen on having prostitution activities decriminalized, had a discussion recently on the pages of rabble.ca (see excerpt below), in response to the March 2 article by Joyce Arthur (see link to article and comments in list of references).
Sue McPherson on March 2, 2012 - 4:38pm.
What is a 'prostitution abolitionist' and who describes themselves thus?
Prostitution is not going to end. The selling of sex is never going to stop. But let's not equate working as a cashier with selling time to men during which they insert their penis into women's bodies. Let's not ever make the laws such that some women who cannot get other kinds of work will be encouraged, legally, or perseuaded, or forced into prostitution.
This topic - and the efforts of women to decriminalize it, cannot be rationalized. The world is a not a rational place but is filled with contradictions, especially where sex is concerned. Unfortunately, or should that be fortunately, prostitution has to stay exactly where it is. If anyone wants to introduce more health benefits, fine. But don't make this act of male penetration (and whatever else) into what might be an unwilling participant, legal.
Sue McPherson on March 2, 2012 - 5:01pm.
Do you know that anyone who contributes towards easier access of sex for men will problaby do better in this world?
You say, "the abolitionist myth that 'prostituted women' are all passive victims of violent predators and pimps leads to an almost-hilarious contradiction when it confronts the realities of sex workers' lives.
I don't know what that is either - "abolitionist myth." I do know that women who have little or nothing are more likely to be the ones who get men coming on to them as though it is their right, as though all women have to contribute something "worthwhile" to the world, and as they see it, sex is it if they have no other means of support, or no one in their lives. Know why women seek out the best possible marriage partner they can - it's because all women must have a man in their lives, if not one, then share many with other women. What a choice! Circumstances play a great part in how one's life will turn out. But sex is always part of it. So, "almost hilarious contractions" is it? Not for everyone.
susan davis on March 2, 2012 - 9:27pm.
thankyou joyce for continuing to fight the mis information campaigns of the abolitionists. the complete disgregard abolitionists have for the facts is the biggest contributing factor to the on going degradation of the safety of sex workers in canada.
people listen, people believe them, policy is written based on these mis representations...
we have to move forward based on the facts and reality of working in the sex industry. i for one need no rescue and have not experienced any violence in years. yes it happens, no one is saying it doesn't. but how is criminalizing people in the sex industry going to help that? it's not. only with sound planning and implementation of industry wide standards will we see improvement in the working conditions of sex workers.
Sue McPherson on March 2, 2012 - 9:57pm.
I doubt very much that policy is written based solely on what you call "misrepresentations," Susan. Unless we know your circumstances, how can we come to understand why you haven't experienced violence while on the job. If you have women siding with you, as protection, perhaps that's what it takes. You're asking the wrong Q when you say, "how is criminalizing people in the sex industry going to help that?" There really isn't an alternative solution to this problem, without putting all female children potentially at risk. I'm sure most people don't want to see prostitutes arrested, but there just isn't another way for police to keep the peace. Prostitution simply cannot be legitimized in the way that you want, without it leading to all sorts of problems within society for other women, especially women who live in poverty.
The problem is, you are only thinking of yourselves, not other women and young girl children learning about the world.
susan davis on March 3, 2012 - 11:10am.
perhaps if you read the reports we wrote on the experiences of 100's of sex workers and didn't subscribe to the idea that sex workers are either victims or greedy gold diggers you could see past your morality based arguements.
i live in total poverty, why is it that it's always the assumption that we are making boat loads of money and that we're so self centered that we are blind to the fate of our sisters in the sex industry?
i have dedicated the last 10 years of my life to the fight for equality, equal access to support services and police protection and improved safety and stability for sex working people in this country.
i have worked for 25 years in an industry with no labour standards or even protection of law. i have been in prison, worked on the street, survived 4 overdoses and numerous assaults and attempts on my life.
who are you? you clearly have not bothered to tkae the time to listen to sex workers from all over canada and to hear that we DO have altneratives, there is a better way to protect us. give us our equality and decriminalize us now.
the only path is to implement occupational health and safety programs and to work towards unweaving the tangled web of mainstream systems biases, not one of which does not affect our lives, and to give sex working people the same rights as every other canadian citizen enjoy.
i am not some lone profiteering exploitative self centered prostitute with only an eye for cash and other people's husbands. i resent the implcation as well. you don't know me.
www.wccsip.ca
www.bccec.wordpress.com
www.tradesecretsguide.blogspot.com read this occupational health and safety training and tell me if you think it will encourage people to enter the sex industry? information about abusive pimps and what happens when you are the victim of an assault and the way the police may treat you is hardly normalizing or encouraging anyone. or how about the extensive lists of health risks? sounds glamourous.
Sue McPherson on March 3, 2012 - 2:33pm.
Is it a question of morality when a person says they would rather their daughter did not become a prostitute? I consider myself fairly open-minded but I still wouldn't want that occupation for my daughter. But if she went into it, it wouldn't make any difference to our relationship, I'm sure. People have different beliefs and ways of perceiving the world and of acting in it, and it can become a problem when different interests collide, as they do over the decriminalization of prostitution. People might like to say "live and let live" as their way of dealing with difference, which is fine unless someone's toes get stepped on. You can do what you like, as long as it doesn't affect me or mine, or society (just because I am interested in how society goes). But what you are asking for - decriminalization, and the right to negoitate legally, does affect me, or could. and it would affect society, as I mentioned in one of my other posts.
You can't talk about sex work as though it is the same as being a cashier, or a firefighter, or a gardener. It - sex - is an act of intimacy, or at least is often considered to be by many people. If not an act of emotional intimacy, then at least it is an act of physical intimacy. Where does one person's individual personal sense of privacy start? Some people don't like to be touched on the arm. But I think there's more who would object to having to let a stranger engage in sexual intercourse with them. I don't see it as being about morality when a person wants the right not to have to argue that they don't want their privacy interfered with on this level. It's bad enough when landlord or maintenance man decides to enter your home without asking first. But one can let that slide. So if prostitution loses its 'criminal" edge, I should think it would make many men more willing to see how far they can take it - and not with the rich and powerful or women with husbands. It will be with the most vulnerable in society. Just because it's your choice doesn't mean that all women want to subjected to the behaviours that will crop up if it is decriminalized.
This is my blog: /http://suemcpherson.blogspot.com . I have written quite a bit about sexual politics and other forms of social inequality, not so much on prostitution per se.
susan davis on March 4, 2012 - 12:57pm.
sue, your privelged upbringing and higher education, your international migrations and lack of experience with poverty, being racialized or marginalized doesn't allow you to understnad the choices made by people who do face those experiences.
it is easy to say sex work is bad, abolish prostitution for the betterment of society because you will not be affected. you comment that you would not want your daughter or grand daughter to engage in sex work. the point is that you will not be there when your child makes a decision about sex work...would you not rather they could make that decision in safety? or would you be willing to see your child go missing? go to prison?be found murdered?fed to the pigs? be cast out of society because of your ideals?
how would that help them? it wouldn't. my parents and the other parents of sex workers feel the same way you do. no one imagines their child becoming a sex worker or dumpster diver or drug dealer, toiletter scrubber, or grave digger...
but it happens, its a fact. continuing to complicate the situation by basing policy on biased and discriminatory ideals rather than fact will cost people, women their lives. are you prepared to own your ideals even if it means the murder of women, and children ...or their incarcaration and humiliation?
there are laws to protect people from assault, slavery, abuse, extortion, debt servitude and labour laws to guarantee safe working conditions. there is the international charter of human rights guarnteeing us equal access to justice and safety.
or is it your belief that only those deemed "good" or "moral" are human and deserving of rights? sex workers were only classifed as human beings in vancouver in 1973. is this the approach you prefer?
we need rights and decriminalization in order to take control of our collective destinies and safety and what we don't need is people trying to impose their tired old ethics at the expense of our lives and safety.it's been 100 years of prohibition, it's over. the social experiment failed miserably, people are dead.
can we please move on and try something new?
Sue McPherson on March 4, 2012 - 2:25pm.
I'm not so secure financially that I don't have to worry about things like that in my own life. I'm living on the edge, so to speak, not from month to month, but wondering how long I can last. All my resources went towards my education (at midlife), leaving me with nothing when there was no career to follow. I hadn't realized that the right relationships, with men and/or women, and conforming (not writing about what I do), were all essential to being accepted and rewarded for all my hard work. Susan, it seems you haven't read anything of mine or you might have realized that. Here's my life story, for additional info: http://samcpherson.homestead.com/StoryofMyLife.html .
So, yes, I do understand the experience of being marginalized and in poverty. And one thing I noticed, in case I didn't make that clear, was the first thing that happens is that men start to close in, figuring it's only a matter of time until you submit sexually, in order to survive.
That's an odd remark about motherhood that you make. Perhaps becoming a prostitute was a one-time decision for you, but I spent much of my time when married making sure my children had every opportunity available, to pursue their interests and learn new ones. It worked for my daughter, who followed our family's interest in swimming to her life's work. My ideals helped that happen. I know life isn't always that straightforward, but my ideals certainly didn't do her harm. As far as my views about sex are concerned, that's up to her what she does.
It's you , Susan, who is putting on this subject the condemnation of religion and saying that is my moral compass too, which it isn't. There can be a kind of 'morality,' if you insist on using that term, that doesn't include the notions of sin or God. I've already said to you that our world is not as rational a place as you would like to think it is. this isn't only about you having your rights. It's also about the rights of others to live in peace, without having to put up with men who start to think even more strongly about their apparent right to have sex with any woman they like. And there are men like that.
If you can address some of these concerns it might do your cause more good than simply demanding the decriminalization of prostitution and the right to negotiate freely with your customers. I don't want to be subjected to men who think that, because the law has changed, that they have the right to offer money to any woman who is vulnerable and isolated, for sex. You have to say how you are going to control men who take this as a new freedom in their lives. I don't want to see young women sent to the local brothel by the job agency because there is no other work avaiable for her.
I haven't actually noticed that laws protect me from illegal and harmful behaviours I have been subjected to. But I have seen women siding with men who do them, and men not wanting to cause offence towards the source of their joy. This is as much about sex as it is about prostitution, the work. I know feminists are fond of saying men and women are equal or should be, and some will work with you towards getting what you want, but their lives aren't going to be affected. Furthermore, when it comes to sexual desires and physical needs, they're not the same at all. I would want to know that world won't be a worse place for the vulnerable if decriminalization were to take place.
susan davis on March 4, 2012 - 2:40pm.
have you read anything we've written ...or the sex worker rights forum here? we have written plenty and people are listening. you seem to be a bit behind the times if you think sex workers aren't speking out.
about your daughter you say "it is up to her what she does" but what if that included sex work? no one is saying people should be forced to do sex work as an alternative to social assistance or that the government should force women into sex work. that is not decriminalization.
as it stands no one can be "forced to work" at any profession, even by the government. why would sex work be any different? why would the government force people into sex work when it does not force people into any other profession? your fears there are unfounded.
however, beauty bias does come into play when now for people trying to access finacial support and are told to become escorts or exotic dancers because they are pretty. some people are denied finacial support because they are a sex worker, whether they want to exit or not.
so how does continuing to criminalize us help with that? it doesn't. it means that anything people do to us is accepteable, we are criminals and get what we deserve.
decriminalization has NOT produced the effect you are describing in any of the countries where it has taken place. in fact the opposite. you are basing your position on moral panic, mis information and a lack of knowledge of the facts. the "vulnerable" are the ones criminalized. the workers on the street bare the brunt of police enforcement actions and as brothels and show lounges are closed due to criminalization, more and more workers are forced onto the street. more and more workers die also. we can see that in the mortality rate of vancouver sex workers escalating over a number decades as a result of uniformed actions taken against our industry. please read the history of sex work thread in the sex worker rights forum.
take a little time to educate yourself on the facts, your position has no backbone in reality. do you care about sex worker safety or not?
Sue McPherson on March 4, 2012 - 4:48pm.
Hey, lady, we all do sex work (or have done). It's what women were born to do! Didn't you know that? Some people are just more open about what they get in return - money, careers, a home with hubby! Most women wouldn't say that about themselves, as it is a norm in society. We are simply raised to be that way. Some are quite knowing and use their feminine wiles in practical ways to get what they want.
It's not the govt who does the persuading, when it comes to what kind of work a person will do. The clerks at the job centre, or the personnel office at the place of work gets to choose who will get accepted and who will not. So anything done to poor people is acceptable - as you seem to already know - unless they are actually doing sex work, then they have worth.
No, I have not seen any facts on how decrimilaization has affected other countries. I don't know how easy it would be to get hold of. I just know what men are like now, and it doesn't take too much effort to see how decriminalizing the negotiation of sex will lead to all sorts of social 'misunderstandings'. Having already been a victim of similar kinds of misunderstandings, where intentions or behaviour were misunderstood, and in situations where such behaviour was regulated against, I can only surmise that it will get worse, if there is no fear of reprisal among men for their bad behaviour.
I have always heard about prostitutes struggles for healthcare, etc, but that also is something many other women and men are not getting in this society. Yes, I'm sure your work is dangerous to your safety. Men can be like that. You may experience more of that, because of your job, but many women have also experienced violence, at the hands of stronger men or men who control them.
I don't see that the ones doing work that is criminalized are the more vulnerable. It's because it is sex work, and men who find themselves in need of sex, or wanting to punish someone for what some other woman has done to them will seek out the most vulnerable - the one isolated, or lacking money, homeless, or without a man in her life.
susan davis on March 4, 2012 - 7:24pm.
the men who purchase sex are not "bad men" nor are all men prone to violence....this seems like you are unwilling to step outside of your comfort zone and actually look up the facts.
why can't men be vulnerable? why do we as a society assume all men are only out for themselves and self gratification? a man whose penis has been amputated to prevent the spread of cancer is vulnerable and in need of care. he is not a "bad" person nor is his lonliess "bad behaviour". he is suffering. why does he not deserve to be comforted and if a sex worker chooses to do so, why should she not comfort him? how is this "bad"?
can you imagine if suddenly being a nurse was illegal? how easy would it be for nurses to work if they were deemed criminals? or how about milk? what if milk was sudeenly illegal and milk producers had to operate in dark isolated areas risking their lives to sell their wares?
i mean criminalizing alcohol didn't "harm" anyone did it? or criminalizing drugs? or abortion? how can you be so blind to the impacts of being deemed criminal and the impact of being the victim of police violence during raids?
you have created a seperate set of rules for sex workers. that is discrimination and is illegal under the international charter of human rights.
please at least have the respect enough if not for us but yourself to actually read up on this a bit and discover perhaps where you may have yourself discriminated against sex workers and ways in which you could better embrace government of canada policies governing research and understand which "facts ' you are being mislead with.
those rules are in place for a reason... to inform canadians about the ethics and reliability of the research findings they are considering. try to understnad from our perspective, being a criminal is a huge barrier as is a criminal record. how is arresting women helping them?
these laws are completely ineffective, its time to protect people not punish them and to try something new.
Sue McPherson on March 4, 2012 - 9:56pm.
But we were talking about the men who made your life less secure - the ones who commit acts of violence? I know from doing research on sexual harassment that not all men who do this are nasty men either - many are husbands and fathers and otherwise good, hardworking, intelligent men.
Oh right - nurses. This entire issue has nothing to sex, is that what you're saying. However, speaking of nurses, read Dutch man sees it his right to have nurses serve his sexual needs: http://suemcpherson.blogspot.com/2010/03/dutch-man-sees-it-his-right-to-have.html ... . I hope you see my point of view.
I do realize that prostitutes are hard done by. So are people in the lower classes picked on more than they deserve. After all, it isn't ALL sex workers who get arrested, is it. eg Dominique Strauss-Kahn and the prostitutes he was involved with. He was so important he didn't even have to admit they were. But sex work is still not the same as being a cashier, much as you would like the Human Rights Commission to say it is. It's pointless for me to simply repeat what I've already said, but that's about it - selling sexual intercourse is not the same as any other job.
No discrimination doesn't apply in the case of prostitution because it's about sex. It's a sensitive topic and we simply cannot have an act of sex for money made legal because of the implications this would have for society. Don't worry about the criminal record. Everyone knows it's unfair and if it's used against you it's because they don't like the colour of your hair or your views on football. Perhaps some lawkeepers want to punish you - just as some of your clients do. But working within the law, if it were changed, won't keep you much safer. The men who would have abused you will have to find other ways of dealing with their frustrations; instead, going after other vulnerable and isolated women. Decriminalizing prostitution isn't going to make the abusive men go away completely. It might make you into an ordinary citizen, just like everyone else, but that won't keep you safe.
Susan, what I can do, with your permission, is publish this discussion we've had on my blog, including a link to the original article on rabble.ca by Joyce Arthur. It's another outlet for people to read your views, and mine.
susan davis on March 5, 2012 - 10:26am.
won't make it "much safer"....based on what research or other countries expeireinces? it will make it safer and the sex workers used by dominque strauss-kahn are not immune. in the US, i watched on "sex slaves in detriot" last night, they arrest women to "rescue" girls. i also commincate with US workers through the social justice work i do...they arrested 100 women in 1 episode, showed their faced, filmed them naked, broadcast it on television....total humiliation, in my opinion it's violence when police to these kinds of degrading things. they were all indoor workers in highend hotels. the sting was police in the hotel baiting the workers. in the end the had "leads" on 3 pimps and 5 "girls" no arrests in that area but had comprimised the safety, confidentiality and dignity of over 100 women.... arresting them all in the name of "rescue".
just becuase you don't hear about sex workers being charged doesn't mean it doesn't happen. thst show was on back to back to back last night....how many women were comprimised throughout the 3 episodes...?
and sure, if you would like to repost this to your blog, i am good with that.
(continued at http://rabble.ca/columnists/2012/03/how-prostitution-abolitionists-substitute-ideologies-facts )
Any changes to prostitution laws not coming soon
By Sam Pazzano
Toronto Sun
June 19, 2011
Ottawa Sun
http://www.ottawasun.com/2011/06/19/any-changes-to-prostitution-lawsnot-coming-soon
How prostitution abolitionists substitute ideologies for facts
By Joyce Arthur
rabble.ca
March 2, 2012
http://rabble.ca/columnists/2012/03/how-prostitution-abolitionists-substitute-ideologies-facts
The mistaken logic of 'asymmetrical criminalization' -- aka the Nordic model of prostitution
By Joyce Arthur
rabble.ca
February 3, 2012
http://rabble.ca/columnists/2012/02/crazy-logic-asymmetrical-criminalization-aka-nordic-model-prostitution
Prostitution ‘not a constitutionally-protected right,’ Crown argues in landmark case
By Kirk Makin
Globe and Mail
June 13, 2011
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/prostitution-not-a-constitutionally-protected-right-crown-argues-in-landmark-case/article2058348/
Who does decriminalization leave out?
By Meghan Murphy
The F Word
January 30, 2012
http://www.feminisms.org/4346/who-does-decriminalization-leave-out/
Sue McPherson on March 2, 2012 - 4:38pm.
What is a 'prostitution abolitionist' and who describes themselves thus?
Prostitution is not going to end. The selling of sex is never going to stop. But let's not equate working as a cashier with selling time to men during which they insert their penis into women's bodies. Let's not ever make the laws such that some women who cannot get other kinds of work will be encouraged, legally, or perseuaded, or forced into prostitution.
This topic - and the efforts of women to decriminalize it, cannot be rationalized. The world is a not a rational place but is filled with contradictions, especially where sex is concerned. Unfortunately, or should that be fortunately, prostitution has to stay exactly where it is. If anyone wants to introduce more health benefits, fine. But don't make this act of male penetration (and whatever else) into what might be an unwilling participant, legal.
Sue McPherson on March 2, 2012 - 5:01pm.
Do you know that anyone who contributes towards easier access of sex for men will problaby do better in this world?
You say, "the abolitionist myth that 'prostituted women' are all passive victims of violent predators and pimps leads to an almost-hilarious contradiction when it confronts the realities of sex workers' lives.
I don't know what that is either - "abolitionist myth." I do know that women who have little or nothing are more likely to be the ones who get men coming on to them as though it is their right, as though all women have to contribute something "worthwhile" to the world, and as they see it, sex is it if they have no other means of support, or no one in their lives. Know why women seek out the best possible marriage partner they can - it's because all women must have a man in their lives, if not one, then share many with other women. What a choice! Circumstances play a great part in how one's life will turn out. But sex is always part of it. So, "almost hilarious contractions" is it? Not for everyone.
susan davis on March 2, 2012 - 9:27pm.
thankyou joyce for continuing to fight the mis information campaigns of the abolitionists. the complete disgregard abolitionists have for the facts is the biggest contributing factor to the on going degradation of the safety of sex workers in canada.
people listen, people believe them, policy is written based on these mis representations...
we have to move forward based on the facts and reality of working in the sex industry. i for one need no rescue and have not experienced any violence in years. yes it happens, no one is saying it doesn't. but how is criminalizing people in the sex industry going to help that? it's not. only with sound planning and implementation of industry wide standards will we see improvement in the working conditions of sex workers.
Sue McPherson on March 2, 2012 - 9:57pm.
I doubt very much that policy is written based solely on what you call "misrepresentations," Susan. Unless we know your circumstances, how can we come to understand why you haven't experienced violence while on the job. If you have women siding with you, as protection, perhaps that's what it takes. You're asking the wrong Q when you say, "how is criminalizing people in the sex industry going to help that?" There really isn't an alternative solution to this problem, without putting all female children potentially at risk. I'm sure most people don't want to see prostitutes arrested, but there just isn't another way for police to keep the peace. Prostitution simply cannot be legitimized in the way that you want, without it leading to all sorts of problems within society for other women, especially women who live in poverty.
The problem is, you are only thinking of yourselves, not other women and young girl children learning about the world.
susan davis on March 3, 2012 - 11:10am.
perhaps if you read the reports we wrote on the experiences of 100's of sex workers and didn't subscribe to the idea that sex workers are either victims or greedy gold diggers you could see past your morality based arguements.
i live in total poverty, why is it that it's always the assumption that we are making boat loads of money and that we're so self centered that we are blind to the fate of our sisters in the sex industry?
i have dedicated the last 10 years of my life to the fight for equality, equal access to support services and police protection and improved safety and stability for sex working people in this country.
i have worked for 25 years in an industry with no labour standards or even protection of law. i have been in prison, worked on the street, survived 4 overdoses and numerous assaults and attempts on my life.
who are you? you clearly have not bothered to tkae the time to listen to sex workers from all over canada and to hear that we DO have altneratives, there is a better way to protect us. give us our equality and decriminalize us now.
the only path is to implement occupational health and safety programs and to work towards unweaving the tangled web of mainstream systems biases, not one of which does not affect our lives, and to give sex working people the same rights as every other canadian citizen enjoy.
i am not some lone profiteering exploitative self centered prostitute with only an eye for cash and other people's husbands. i resent the implcation as well. you don't know me.
www.wccsip.ca
www.bccec.wordpress.com
www.tradesecretsguide.blogspot.com read this occupational health and safety training and tell me if you think it will encourage people to enter the sex industry? information about abusive pimps and what happens when you are the victim of an assault and the way the police may treat you is hardly normalizing or encouraging anyone. or how about the extensive lists of health risks? sounds glamourous.
Sue McPherson on March 3, 2012 - 2:33pm.
Is it a question of morality when a person says they would rather their daughter did not become a prostitute? I consider myself fairly open-minded but I still wouldn't want that occupation for my daughter. But if she went into it, it wouldn't make any difference to our relationship, I'm sure. People have different beliefs and ways of perceiving the world and of acting in it, and it can become a problem when different interests collide, as they do over the decriminalization of prostitution. People might like to say "live and let live" as their way of dealing with difference, which is fine unless someone's toes get stepped on. You can do what you like, as long as it doesn't affect me or mine, or society (just because I am interested in how society goes). But what you are asking for - decriminalization, and the right to negoitate legally, does affect me, or could. and it would affect society, as I mentioned in one of my other posts.
You can't talk about sex work as though it is the same as being a cashier, or a firefighter, or a gardener. It - sex - is an act of intimacy, or at least is often considered to be by many people. If not an act of emotional intimacy, then at least it is an act of physical intimacy. Where does one person's individual personal sense of privacy start? Some people don't like to be touched on the arm. But I think there's more who would object to having to let a stranger engage in sexual intercourse with them. I don't see it as being about morality when a person wants the right not to have to argue that they don't want their privacy interfered with on this level. It's bad enough when landlord or maintenance man decides to enter your home without asking first. But one can let that slide. So if prostitution loses its 'criminal" edge, I should think it would make many men more willing to see how far they can take it - and not with the rich and powerful or women with husbands. It will be with the most vulnerable in society. Just because it's your choice doesn't mean that all women want to subjected to the behaviours that will crop up if it is decriminalized.
This is my blog: /http://suemcpherson.blogspot.com . I have written quite a bit about sexual politics and other forms of social inequality, not so much on prostitution per se.
susan davis on March 4, 2012 - 12:57pm.
sue, your privelged upbringing and higher education, your international migrations and lack of experience with poverty, being racialized or marginalized doesn't allow you to understnad the choices made by people who do face those experiences.
it is easy to say sex work is bad, abolish prostitution for the betterment of society because you will not be affected. you comment that you would not want your daughter or grand daughter to engage in sex work. the point is that you will not be there when your child makes a decision about sex work...would you not rather they could make that decision in safety? or would you be willing to see your child go missing? go to prison?be found murdered?fed to the pigs? be cast out of society because of your ideals?
how would that help them? it wouldn't. my parents and the other parents of sex workers feel the same way you do. no one imagines their child becoming a sex worker or dumpster diver or drug dealer, toiletter scrubber, or grave digger...
but it happens, its a fact. continuing to complicate the situation by basing policy on biased and discriminatory ideals rather than fact will cost people, women their lives. are you prepared to own your ideals even if it means the murder of women, and children ...or their incarcaration and humiliation?
there are laws to protect people from assault, slavery, abuse, extortion, debt servitude and labour laws to guarantee safe working conditions. there is the international charter of human rights guarnteeing us equal access to justice and safety.
or is it your belief that only those deemed "good" or "moral" are human and deserving of rights? sex workers were only classifed as human beings in vancouver in 1973. is this the approach you prefer?
we need rights and decriminalization in order to take control of our collective destinies and safety and what we don't need is people trying to impose their tired old ethics at the expense of our lives and safety.it's been 100 years of prohibition, it's over. the social experiment failed miserably, people are dead.
can we please move on and try something new?
Sue McPherson on March 4, 2012 - 2:25pm.
I'm not so secure financially that I don't have to worry about things like that in my own life. I'm living on the edge, so to speak, not from month to month, but wondering how long I can last. All my resources went towards my education (at midlife), leaving me with nothing when there was no career to follow. I hadn't realized that the right relationships, with men and/or women, and conforming (not writing about what I do), were all essential to being accepted and rewarded for all my hard work. Susan, it seems you haven't read anything of mine or you might have realized that. Here's my life story, for additional info: http://samcpherson.homestead.com/StoryofMyLife.html .
So, yes, I do understand the experience of being marginalized and in poverty. And one thing I noticed, in case I didn't make that clear, was the first thing that happens is that men start to close in, figuring it's only a matter of time until you submit sexually, in order to survive.
That's an odd remark about motherhood that you make. Perhaps becoming a prostitute was a one-time decision for you, but I spent much of my time when married making sure my children had every opportunity available, to pursue their interests and learn new ones. It worked for my daughter, who followed our family's interest in swimming to her life's work. My ideals helped that happen. I know life isn't always that straightforward, but my ideals certainly didn't do her harm. As far as my views about sex are concerned, that's up to her what she does.
It's you , Susan, who is putting on this subject the condemnation of religion and saying that is my moral compass too, which it isn't. There can be a kind of 'morality,' if you insist on using that term, that doesn't include the notions of sin or God. I've already said to you that our world is not as rational a place as you would like to think it is. this isn't only about you having your rights. It's also about the rights of others to live in peace, without having to put up with men who start to think even more strongly about their apparent right to have sex with any woman they like. And there are men like that.
If you can address some of these concerns it might do your cause more good than simply demanding the decriminalization of prostitution and the right to negotiate freely with your customers. I don't want to be subjected to men who think that, because the law has changed, that they have the right to offer money to any woman who is vulnerable and isolated, for sex. You have to say how you are going to control men who take this as a new freedom in their lives. I don't want to see young women sent to the local brothel by the job agency because there is no other work avaiable for her.
I haven't actually noticed that laws protect me from illegal and harmful behaviours I have been subjected to. But I have seen women siding with men who do them, and men not wanting to cause offence towards the source of their joy. This is as much about sex as it is about prostitution, the work. I know feminists are fond of saying men and women are equal or should be, and some will work with you towards getting what you want, but their lives aren't going to be affected. Furthermore, when it comes to sexual desires and physical needs, they're not the same at all. I would want to know that world won't be a worse place for the vulnerable if decriminalization were to take place.
susan davis on March 4, 2012 - 2:40pm.
have you read anything we've written ...or the sex worker rights forum here? we have written plenty and people are listening. you seem to be a bit behind the times if you think sex workers aren't speking out.
about your daughter you say "it is up to her what she does" but what if that included sex work? no one is saying people should be forced to do sex work as an alternative to social assistance or that the government should force women into sex work. that is not decriminalization.
as it stands no one can be "forced to work" at any profession, even by the government. why would sex work be any different? why would the government force people into sex work when it does not force people into any other profession? your fears there are unfounded.
however, beauty bias does come into play when now for people trying to access finacial support and are told to become escorts or exotic dancers because they are pretty. some people are denied finacial support because they are a sex worker, whether they want to exit or not.
so how does continuing to criminalize us help with that? it doesn't. it means that anything people do to us is accepteable, we are criminals and get what we deserve.
decriminalization has NOT produced the effect you are describing in any of the countries where it has taken place. in fact the opposite. you are basing your position on moral panic, mis information and a lack of knowledge of the facts. the "vulnerable" are the ones criminalized. the workers on the street bare the brunt of police enforcement actions and as brothels and show lounges are closed due to criminalization, more and more workers are forced onto the street. more and more workers die also. we can see that in the mortality rate of vancouver sex workers escalating over a number decades as a result of uniformed actions taken against our industry. please read the history of sex work thread in the sex worker rights forum.
take a little time to educate yourself on the facts, your position has no backbone in reality. do you care about sex worker safety or not?
Sue McPherson on March 4, 2012 - 4:48pm.
Hey, lady, we all do sex work (or have done). It's what women were born to do! Didn't you know that? Some people are just more open about what they get in return - money, careers, a home with hubby! Most women wouldn't say that about themselves, as it is a norm in society. We are simply raised to be that way. Some are quite knowing and use their feminine wiles in practical ways to get what they want.
It's not the govt who does the persuading, when it comes to what kind of work a person will do. The clerks at the job centre, or the personnel office at the place of work gets to choose who will get accepted and who will not. So anything done to poor people is acceptable - as you seem to already know - unless they are actually doing sex work, then they have worth.
No, I have not seen any facts on how decrimilaization has affected other countries. I don't know how easy it would be to get hold of. I just know what men are like now, and it doesn't take too much effort to see how decriminalizing the negotiation of sex will lead to all sorts of social 'misunderstandings'. Having already been a victim of similar kinds of misunderstandings, where intentions or behaviour were misunderstood, and in situations where such behaviour was regulated against, I can only surmise that it will get worse, if there is no fear of reprisal among men for their bad behaviour.
I have always heard about prostitutes struggles for healthcare, etc, but that also is something many other women and men are not getting in this society. Yes, I'm sure your work is dangerous to your safety. Men can be like that. You may experience more of that, because of your job, but many women have also experienced violence, at the hands of stronger men or men who control them.
I don't see that the ones doing work that is criminalized are the more vulnerable. It's because it is sex work, and men who find themselves in need of sex, or wanting to punish someone for what some other woman has done to them will seek out the most vulnerable - the one isolated, or lacking money, homeless, or without a man in her life.
susan davis on March 4, 2012 - 7:24pm.
the men who purchase sex are not "bad men" nor are all men prone to violence....this seems like you are unwilling to step outside of your comfort zone and actually look up the facts.
why can't men be vulnerable? why do we as a society assume all men are only out for themselves and self gratification? a man whose penis has been amputated to prevent the spread of cancer is vulnerable and in need of care. he is not a "bad" person nor is his lonliess "bad behaviour". he is suffering. why does he not deserve to be comforted and if a sex worker chooses to do so, why should she not comfort him? how is this "bad"?
can you imagine if suddenly being a nurse was illegal? how easy would it be for nurses to work if they were deemed criminals? or how about milk? what if milk was sudeenly illegal and milk producers had to operate in dark isolated areas risking their lives to sell their wares?
i mean criminalizing alcohol didn't "harm" anyone did it? or criminalizing drugs? or abortion? how can you be so blind to the impacts of being deemed criminal and the impact of being the victim of police violence during raids?
you have created a seperate set of rules for sex workers. that is discrimination and is illegal under the international charter of human rights.
please at least have the respect enough if not for us but yourself to actually read up on this a bit and discover perhaps where you may have yourself discriminated against sex workers and ways in which you could better embrace government of canada policies governing research and understand which "facts ' you are being mislead with.
those rules are in place for a reason... to inform canadians about the ethics and reliability of the research findings they are considering. try to understnad from our perspective, being a criminal is a huge barrier as is a criminal record. how is arresting women helping them?
these laws are completely ineffective, its time to protect people not punish them and to try something new.
Sue McPherson on March 4, 2012 - 9:56pm.
But we were talking about the men who made your life less secure - the ones who commit acts of violence? I know from doing research on sexual harassment that not all men who do this are nasty men either - many are husbands and fathers and otherwise good, hardworking, intelligent men.
Oh right - nurses. This entire issue has nothing to sex, is that what you're saying. However, speaking of nurses, read Dutch man sees it his right to have nurses serve his sexual needs: http://suemcpherson.blogspot.com/2010/03/dutch-man-sees-it-his-right-to-have.html ... . I hope you see my point of view.
I do realize that prostitutes are hard done by. So are people in the lower classes picked on more than they deserve. After all, it isn't ALL sex workers who get arrested, is it. eg Dominique Strauss-Kahn and the prostitutes he was involved with. He was so important he didn't even have to admit they were. But sex work is still not the same as being a cashier, much as you would like the Human Rights Commission to say it is. It's pointless for me to simply repeat what I've already said, but that's about it - selling sexual intercourse is not the same as any other job.
No discrimination doesn't apply in the case of prostitution because it's about sex. It's a sensitive topic and we simply cannot have an act of sex for money made legal because of the implications this would have for society. Don't worry about the criminal record. Everyone knows it's unfair and if it's used against you it's because they don't like the colour of your hair or your views on football. Perhaps some lawkeepers want to punish you - just as some of your clients do. But working within the law, if it were changed, won't keep you much safer. The men who would have abused you will have to find other ways of dealing with their frustrations; instead, going after other vulnerable and isolated women. Decriminalizing prostitution isn't going to make the abusive men go away completely. It might make you into an ordinary citizen, just like everyone else, but that won't keep you safe.
Susan, what I can do, with your permission, is publish this discussion we've had on my blog, including a link to the original article on rabble.ca by Joyce Arthur. It's another outlet for people to read your views, and mine.
susan davis on March 5, 2012 - 10:26am.
won't make it "much safer"....based on what research or other countries expeireinces? it will make it safer and the sex workers used by dominque strauss-kahn are not immune. in the US, i watched on "sex slaves in detriot" last night, they arrest women to "rescue" girls. i also commincate with US workers through the social justice work i do...they arrested 100 women in 1 episode, showed their faced, filmed them naked, broadcast it on television....total humiliation, in my opinion it's violence when police to these kinds of degrading things. they were all indoor workers in highend hotels. the sting was police in the hotel baiting the workers. in the end the had "leads" on 3 pimps and 5 "girls" no arrests in that area but had comprimised the safety, confidentiality and dignity of over 100 women.... arresting them all in the name of "rescue".
just becuase you don't hear about sex workers being charged doesn't mean it doesn't happen. thst show was on back to back to back last night....how many women were comprimised throughout the 3 episodes...?
and sure, if you would like to repost this to your blog, i am good with that.
(continued at http://rabble.ca/columnists/2012/03/how-prostitution-abolitionists-substitute-ideologies-facts )
Any changes to prostitution laws not coming soon
By Sam Pazzano
Toronto Sun
June 19, 2011
Ottawa Sun
http://www.ottawasun.com/2011/06/19/any-changes-to-prostitution-lawsnot-coming-soon
How prostitution abolitionists substitute ideologies for facts
By Joyce Arthur
rabble.ca
March 2, 2012
http://rabble.ca/columnists/2012/03/how-prostitution-abolitionists-substitute-ideologies-facts
The mistaken logic of 'asymmetrical criminalization' -- aka the Nordic model of prostitution
By Joyce Arthur
rabble.ca
February 3, 2012
http://rabble.ca/columnists/2012/02/crazy-logic-asymmetrical-criminalization-aka-nordic-model-prostitution
Prostitution ‘not a constitutionally-protected right,’ Crown argues in landmark case
By Kirk Makin
Globe and Mail
June 13, 2011
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/prostitution-not-a-constitutionally-protected-right-crown-argues-in-landmark-case/article2058348/
Who does decriminalization leave out?
By Meghan Murphy
The F Word
January 30, 2012
http://www.feminisms.org/4346/who-does-decriminalization-leave-out/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)