Title: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: mistress_magpie on February 25, 2014, 03:35:27 PM I actually managed to miss an opportunity to talk about bitcoin in this piece - I could have added how bitcoin deposits help build trust and weed out timewasters.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/25/sex-workers-right-to-refuse Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: hilariousandco on February 25, 2014, 03:48:42 PM Quote This week, newspapers reported a complaint made to Harrow borough council's Trading Standards office by a man who had been refused service by an escort. I am angered but unsurprised by his complaint; it seems to come from a familiar perception that sex workers are mere automatons, not skilled professionals. Ha, not heard about that, but could there be anything more embarrassing for a man than to be turned down by a sex-worker? Of course, I respect sex-workers' rights to refuse service though, and it must be difficult for you to actually have to refuse people too. Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: Kiki112 on February 25, 2014, 08:42:57 PM I actually managed to miss an opportunity to talk about bitcoin in this piece - I could have added how bitcoin deposits help build trust and weed out timewasters. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/25/sex-workers-right-to-refuse yeah, bitcoin definitely weeds something out :D Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: mistress_magpie on February 26, 2014, 12:22:10 AM Quote This week, newspapers reported a complaint made to Harrow borough council's Trading Standards office by a man who had been refused service by an escort. I am angered but unsurprised by his complaint; it seems to come from a familiar perception that sex workers are mere automatons, not skilled professionals. Ha, not heard about that, but could there be anything more embarrassing for a man than to be turned down by a sex-worker? Of course, I respect sex-workers' rights to refuse service though, and it must be difficult for you to actually have to refuse people too. Sometimes I need to refuse someone because they just stink and have no sense of hygiene. I'm actually pretty good at being delicate about this, and people have literally cleaned up their act, and come back. With people that seem sociopathic, nuts or dangerous I just get them away from me as quickly as possible. Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: Vod on February 26, 2014, 12:43:34 AM "Rights" of criminals and illegal activities. Funny ::)
Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: Remember remember the 5th of November on February 26, 2014, 01:15:40 AM Quote This week, newspapers reported a complaint made to Harrow borough council's Trading Standards office by a man who had been refused service by an escort. I am angered but unsurprised by his complaint; it seems to come from a familiar perception that sex workers are mere automatons, not skilled professionals. Ha, not heard about that, but could there be anything more embarrassing for a man than to be turned down by a sex-worker? Of course, I respect sex-workers' rights to refuse service though, and it must be difficult for you to actually have to refuse people too. Sometimes I need to refuse someone because they just stink and have no sense of hygiene. I'm actually pretty good at being delicate about this, and people have literally cleaned up their act, and come back. With people that seem sociopathic, nuts or dangerous I just get them away from me as quickly as possible. Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: lzp729 on February 26, 2014, 01:36:36 AM could not open your link :( sounds you are turned down by sex-worker? what did you ask for ;D
Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: Foxpup on February 26, 2014, 05:35:15 AM could not open your link :( sounds you are turned down by sex-worker? what did you ask for ;D *dope slap* Mistress Magpie is the sex worker. Pay attention.Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: hilariousandco on February 26, 2014, 10:37:54 AM Quote This week, newspapers reported a complaint made to Harrow borough council's Trading Standards office by a man who had been refused service by an escort. I am angered but unsurprised by his complaint; it seems to come from a familiar perception that sex workers are mere automatons, not skilled professionals. Ha, not heard about that, but could there be anything more embarrassing for a man than to be turned down by a sex-worker? Of course, I respect sex-workers' rights to refuse service though, and it must be difficult for you to actually have to refuse people too. Sometimes I need to refuse someone because they just stink and have no sense of hygiene. Yeah, I know, but essentialy being told you stink to the point of repulsion no matter how politely you put it is a pretty heavy blow. "Rights" of criminals and illegal activities. Funny ::) Being a sexworker or a prostitute isn't illegal in a lot of places, and just like drugs, where it is, it shouldn't be. Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: DeathProxy on February 26, 2014, 04:18:38 PM But most of the time if you increase the money they will accept. :)
Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: hilariousandco on February 26, 2014, 04:20:22 PM But most of the time if you increase the money they will accept. :) I guess it's not about the money but standards and safety. An extra £50 for some fat sweaty psychopath who's going to stab you at the end of it probably isn't worth it :D. Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: Ibian on February 26, 2014, 05:30:05 PM Is there some kind of problem with calling prostitutes prostitutes?
Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: hilariousandco on February 26, 2014, 05:45:20 PM Is there some kind of problem with calling prostitutes prostitutes? I think 'sex worker' is the less offensive politcally correct term. I mean, you could refer to people of African descent as 'darkies' or 'coloureds' if you wanted, but it's frowned upon. Also, if you were referring to Magpie herself, as far as I'm aware, she's not a prostitute but a dominatrix. Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: Ibian on February 26, 2014, 05:55:42 PM Is there some kind of problem with calling prostitutes prostitutes? I think 'sex worker' is the less offensive politcally correct term. I mean, you could refer to people of African descent as 'darkies' or 'coloureds' if you wanted, but it's frowned upon. Also, if you were referring to Magpie herself, as far as I'm aware, she's not a prostitute but a dominatrix. Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: hilariousandco on February 26, 2014, 06:03:51 PM Is there some kind of problem with calling prostitutes prostitutes? I think 'sex worker' is the less offensive politcally correct term. I mean, you could refer to people of African descent as 'darkies' or 'coloureds' if you wanted, but it's frowned upon. Also, if you were referring to Magpie herself, as far as I'm aware, she's not a prostitute but a dominatrix. I never said you were American, so I'm confused by what you mean by that and 'superstition', but I don't think you get to decide what is and isn't offensive to someone or not. I would imagine some sex workers will find the term 'prostitute' offensive, especially when they're not one. I think it's a similar situation with the words 'midget' and 'spastic' etc. Both valid words but were gradually used as slurs and became offensive. You might not think they're offensive, but the the majority of the people they affect and refer to do. Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: Ibian on February 26, 2014, 06:09:13 PM Is there some kind of problem with calling prostitutes prostitutes? I think 'sex worker' is the less offensive politcally correct term. I mean, you could refer to people of African descent as 'darkies' or 'coloureds' if you wanted, but it's frowned upon. Also, if you were referring to Magpie herself, as far as I'm aware, she's not a prostitute but a dominatrix. I never said you were American, so I'm confused by what you mean by that and 'superstition', but I don't think you get to decide what is and isn't offensive to someone or not. I would imagine some sex workers will find the term 'prostitute' offensive, especially when they're not one. I think it's a similar situation with the words 'midget' and 'spastic' etc. Both valid words but were gradually used as slurs and became offensive. You might not think they're offensive, but the the majority of the people they affect and refer to do. Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: Sheldor333 on February 26, 2014, 06:44:02 PM What does bitcoin have to do with sex workers? Unless they are paying their services in bitcoins. That would be something new. ;D
Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: hilariousandco on February 26, 2014, 07:08:27 PM Is there some kind of problem with calling prostitutes prostitutes? I think 'sex worker' is the less offensive politcally correct term. I mean, you could refer to people of African descent as 'darkies' or 'coloureds' if you wanted, but it's frowned upon. Also, if you were referring to Magpie herself, as far as I'm aware, she's not a prostitute but a dominatrix. I never said you were American, so I'm confused by what you mean by that and 'superstition', but I don't think you get to decide what is and isn't offensive to someone or not. I would imagine some sex workers will find the term 'prostitute' offensive, especially when they're not one. I think it's a similar situation with the words 'midget' and 'spastic' etc. Both valid words but were gradually used as slurs and became offensive. You might not think they're offensive, but the the majority of the people they affect and refer to do. Of course it is. That's no excuse. Do you honestly expect a respectable paper like The Guardian to refer to sex workers as whores or street meat? You can use those words with your friends if you want, but there are certain words that are largely considered offensive because they're slurs or derogatory, which is what you are being. Racists say the same thing when they get told off for saying nigger or coloureds or darkies etc. If you called a dwarf a midget you will offend the majority of dwarves because it's an offensive pejorative term and you don't get to decide what someone finds offensive or not. You're free to use offensive terms if you want and it doesn't actually bother me when people do as I'd just think you were an ignorant fool if you did and wouldn't really respect that persons opinion or judgement if they continued to use them after they'd been told why they were offensive to a particular person or group, but you can't use the excuse 'everything is offensive to someone' to use words that people clearly find offensive. And I personally don't have a problem with the word prostitute, but If I said it about a sex worker who found it offensive I wouldn't say it to her again. Magpie and other Dominatrixes might find being called prostitutes offensive when they're not one. Some might not be bothered, some might be, but I'd take that on a case by case basis. What does bitcoin have to do with sex workers? Unless they are paying their services in bitcoins. That would be something new. ;D Well Magpie is a Libertarian and an advocate of Bitcoin and is trying to get Bitcoin involved in her particular line of work. Bitcoin could really thrive in the sex/porn industries. Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: Ibian on February 26, 2014, 07:26:11 PM Is there some kind of problem with calling prostitutes prostitutes? I think 'sex worker' is the less offensive politcally correct term. I mean, you could refer to people of African descent as 'darkies' or 'coloureds' if you wanted, but it's frowned upon. Also, if you were referring to Magpie herself, as far as I'm aware, she's not a prostitute but a dominatrix. I never said you were American, so I'm confused by what you mean by that and 'superstition', but I don't think you get to decide what is and isn't offensive to someone or not. I would imagine some sex workers will find the term 'prostitute' offensive, especially when they're not one. I think it's a similar situation with the words 'midget' and 'spastic' etc. Both valid words but were gradually used as slurs and became offensive. You might not think they're offensive, but the the majority of the people they affect and refer to do. Of course it is. That's no excuse. Do you honestly expect a respectable paper like The Guardian to refer to sex workers as whores or street meat? You can use those words with your friends if you want, but there are certain words that are largely considered offensive because they're slurs or derogatory, which is what you are being. Racists say the same thing when they get told off for saying nigger or coloureds or darkies etc. If you called a dwarf a midget you will offend the majority of dwarves because it's an offensive pejorative term and you don't get to decide what someone finds offensive or not. You're free to use offensive terms if you want and it doesn't actually bother me when people do as I'd just think you were an ignorant fool if you did and wouldn't really respect that persons opinion or judgement if they continued to use them after they'd been told why they were offensive to a particular person or group, but you can't use the excuse 'everything is offensive to someone' to use words that people clearly find offensive. And I personally don't have a problem with the word prostitute, but If I said it about a sex worker who found it offensive I wouldn't say it to her again. Magpie and other Dominatrixes might find being called prostitutes offensive when they're not one. Some might not be bothered, some might be, but I'd take that on a case by case basis. What does bitcoin have to do with sex workers? Unless they are paying their services in bitcoins. That would be something new. ;D Well Magpie is a Libertarian and an advocate of Bitcoin and is trying to get Bitcoin involved in her particular line of work. Bitcoin could really thrive in the sex/porn industries. And I'm not really interested in your opinion, for the record. As noted, there are people who get offended over anything. I'm curious why prostitutes would be upset over being called what they are. Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: hilariousandco on February 26, 2014, 07:43:55 PM It's what the profession is called. It's not offensive. It's descriptive. Prostitution is what prostitutes do. Including those who don't put dick in vagina, yes. Prostitutes charge for penetrative sex. I'm no expert but Doms provide other services other than penetrative sex. Some will do both, but I don't think Magpie does, so therefore she might find it offensive or derogatory or maybe she's not bothered, but that still doesn't make it ok to say it to someone who does find it offensive. I can't comment on whether it's offensive or not as I'm not a sex worker or in the industry, but hopefully Magpie would clarify later as I'd like to hear her thoughts on the matter. Again though, how can you tell me what somebody else does or doesn't find offensive? There are lots of terms or words that started out as being fine to use, but are no longer because they became used as insults. Calling someone a midget is descriptive, but it's also offensive. And I'm not really interested in your opinion, for the record. As noted, there are people who get offended over anything. I'm curious why prostitutes would be upset over being called what they are. So you are or aren't curious why, because I've just explained to you in several ways why some sex workers might find it offensive. Not all sex workers are prostitutes. Most Dominatrixes aren't prostitutes; there's a difference. Why do Indians not like being called Pakis? Because they're different and not the same and that's an offensive term whether you might think it is or isn't. If you really need more examples or explanations or are still confused then you really aren't able to process information very well. Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: Ibian on February 26, 2014, 07:51:01 PM Maybe you should let the prostitute speak for herself. Who knows, she might find it offensive that you presume to speak for her.
Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: Kiki112 on February 26, 2014, 10:25:26 PM damn, if a prostitute turned you down, I really..
damn, I have nothing to say poor guy, he's probably going to jump off a bridge or something, this isn't good for anything :D Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: hilariousandco on February 26, 2014, 10:38:04 PM Maybe you should let the prostitute speak for herself. Who knows, she might find it offensive that you presume to speak for her. I'm not speaking for her opinion on this, but this goes back to my thoughts that you can't process information very well as I haven't once stated what she does find offensive, but what her and others may or might do and gave you several examples and reasons for this, but I think it's become clear you just want to be derogatory for the sake, especially by referring to her as "the prostitute". I guess you probably just have a misogynistic or condescending attitude to women and sex workers and want to say the most offensive thing about them as possible to demean 'em because you look down upon them. It's probably just another form of slut-shaming really. Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: mistress_magpie on February 27, 2014, 11:32:42 PM Hilarious can speak for me whenever he wants. Quality defence there. I use the term sex worker for everyone from camgirls to escorts. I do not do sexual contact, but I use the word sex worker because it is a term designed to build solidarity among the different types of sex worker based on what we have in common. I am a libertarian socialist and I am a strong advocate of bitcoin.
Very happy to answer queries but I am on holiday so it is a bit slow. Also I am UK based. Title: Re: I'm in the Guardian again - on the right of sex workers to refuse a client. Post by: mistress_magpie on February 27, 2014, 11:36:08 PM And yes that is indeed my article :)
|