I have had the honor of writing an article at the behest of Barbarossaa concerning the hideously gynocentric propaganda piece appearing on the British hack-rag newspaper The Guardian‘s website. It is an histrionic denunciation of this week’s Amnesty International voting to adopting a resolution opposing the criminalization of sex purchase along the Swedish Model, already enforced in Canada, and under consideration in countries like France and Ireland.
500 delegates of Amnesty International from 80 countries have assembled in Dublin, Ireland to militate for the rights and protection of prostitutes. So the politically biased newspaper The Guardian (which: “speaks with more urgency than its rivals on social justice”) has posted its article entitled There can be no amnesty for those who buy sex – not even if women “consent”. Great! We can now throw all those ridiculous “enthusiastic consent” laws right out the window because even if the woman consents, it is still an act of misogynistic abuse. The sarcastic quotation marks around the word “consent” make it clear that a woman is incapable of deciding for herself that to which she agrees because Sex Fascists will let her know that she is nothing more than a hapless victim devoid of agency and therefore, like a child, cannot truly consent. The man, naturally, is endowed with reason and is thus responsible for his reprehensible solicitation, right?
The very first paragraph ends with sneer-marks and these might hit a tad close to home, gentlemen: “[…] buying sex from women in prostitution is an important human right for some men to improve ‘their life enjoyment and dignity’ “
The article bloviates against prostitution through the tired rhetoric of Human Trafficking and is emotionally loaded with the typical tropes of the Victimization Industry: terms such as “victim”, “exploited”, “slavery”, and the ever popular “survivor”; themes encountered in all of the most lucrative female literature. The trafficking narrative comes replete with horror stories about young girls, even children, under the control of nefarious men who are the contemporary equivalent of the barbarous Arab slave-master defiling the purity of our damsels-in-distress begging for rescue: the modern-day Bodice Ripper, and what do all Anti-Prostitution websites have in common: a very visible DONATE button! But does such a trade exist? It would appear that Human Trafficking is a myth propagated by those who seek to profit from the Rescue Industry and the perennial sex-hating puritans who have always persecuted prostitutes and their clientèle; to wit: Anti-Trafficking is code-word for Anti-Prostitution…
NGO’s like Polaris Project (to whom Google has donated 11.5M$) capitalize on Gynocentrism by describing all prostitution as coercive. Not surprizingly, they are headquartered in Washington D.C. where they claim to monitor Human Trafficking. That’s right, Human Trafficking is so prevalent that it occurs in the capital of the United States right under the nose of the F.B.I. and the government. Profiteers work with law enforcement to raid suspected traffickers resulting only in the arrest and maltreatment of sex workers while migrant/illegal alien prostitutes are detained in punitive ICE’s and deported (which when you think about it, is kinda like, oh I don’t know… Human Trafficking!)
It seems these “rescuers” are too busy appearing magnanimous to consider the small problem of Female Agency as they never bothered to ask sex workers whether they needed rescuing in the first place. But this can be overlooked as made up estimates and statistics are all that Anti-Trafficking organizations need to justify their activity; we can simply ignore all the evidence which contradicts the over-dramatic narrative e.g. “Embarrasingly, these police findings seem to contest research published just days earlier by Irish anti-trafficking campaigners”. Despite the governments own reports, Obama continues to pander to the gynocentric vote through the quasi-spiritual raising of SJW “awareness” year after year.
Who profits? Everyday Feminists like Derek Ellerman who co-founded Polaris Project with Katherine Chon, an Ivy League graduate in (surprize!) Psychology. Most opportunists are privileged White women with useless college degrees but who are too good to get a real job. So they secure funding to build networks of useless programs and NGO’s to give themselves cushy, high-paying jobs which feed their female ego’s hunger for self-importance to the point of calling themselves “experts” on Human Trafficking.
So long as they use the media and higher-education to promote their myth of misogyny, they can cruise the depths of ideological enforcement like sharks where anyone questioning their raison d’être or simply deemed a Thought Criminal is hounded out via witch-hunt as a sacrificial lamb.
“What we’ve got here is like something straight out of Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four, where champions of human rights have decided to use that position to endorse, not only the abusers, but the system itself in which victims are abused.”
Returning to Ireland, we have the case of Rachel Moran, an “abolitionist” claiming to be a former prostitute in Dublin who has written a sad, emotional book about her “slavery” called Paid For: My Journey through Prostitution. So naturally, she has been given awards. Coincidentally, she wrote her “brave” account right after she graduated with a useless degree in (surprize!) Journalism. However, not everyone is fooled by “Moran’s pantomime performance as victim-turned-author”, says Maggie McNeil, a former call-girl who maintains a blog about Sex Work. There is even evidence that Moran plagiarized the material in her book as this affidavit swears. We can add Moran to the long list of phonies who bury their snouts in the trough of commercial reward filled by the slop-bucket of sanctimonious NGO’s, government agencies and mainstream media. Moran is calling for Ireland to adopt the above mentioned Swedish Model alongside organizations like Ruhama, which claims to help female “victims” and receives funding from (surprize!) the government.
Except for one little forgotten detail… Ruhama (which means “New Life” in Hebrew) was founded by Female religious orders who used state funding to ENSLAVE women internationally!! Ever heard of the Magdalene Asylums? These were privately owned workhouses where prostitutes and other marginalized women were kept under forceable confinement and used as unfree labor. These women were abused and held prisoner for years and sometimes decades. If some should die for any reason, they would simply be tossed into mass graves. These “asylums” were found throughout Europe and North America. Ireland had the longest surviving “laundries” with the last to close in 1996. Ruhama claims to “advocate” for Women’s Rights and yet their predecessor enslaved 30,000 women! These prisons of institutionalized misogyny were founded by covens of religious women viz.
- Sisters of Our Lady of Charity of Refuge
- Congregation of the Sisters of Mercy
- Religious Sisters of Charity
- Sisters of the Good Shepherd
This was even publicized on Ruhama’s own website:
“Ruhama was founded as a joint initiative of the Good Shepherd Sisters and Our Lady of Charity Sisters, both of which had a long history of involvement with marginalized women, including those involved in prostitution.6“
That is, until the truth was conveniently removed. So we find the usual suspects under a different name but their aim hasn’t changed: the persecution of prostitutes and their clients. The only thing that has changed is the narrative.
The Guardian article in question was written by Esohe Aghatise who used it to advertize the International Law “experts” at Equality Now where (surprize!) she works as an “Anti-trafficking manager”.
As usual, the blame (and liability) falls squarely on the shoulders of the so-called “Johns” i.e. the men who purchase sex. Campaigners petition governments to “Stop the Demand“. This surreal proposal seems like classic female thinking as it is vague and undefined yet a bellicose command and there is a clear separation between the concept and reality. Just how exactly are governments supposed to end the demand for prostitution?! Do we anesthetize men or force women to have sex for nothing in exchange? Would abolishing marriage end the demand? Just what in the blue fuck does that mean? What do these women even understand by the term “demand”? Is it something which will dissipate at the wave of a magic wond or something…?
Under the misandrist Swedish Model, these Demand-Predators are sent to Re-education Camps called John Schools which (surprize!) costs the arrested man money to attended and in places like Toronto goes to fund (surprize!) social programs aimed at “rehabilitating” prostitutes so that a rose by any other name still smells like the government forcing the transfer of resources from men to women without getting sex in return and throughout the international opposition to Anti-Prostitution efforts, the real victims: men, are hardly mentioned at all; it would seem that nothing is more important than the plight of women…