XX

My attempt to clarify that I wasn’t criticizing, but, rather, agreeing = failure.

Ah, I see.

Absolute agreement!

No, actually that’s exactly what I’m suggesting. It is paternalistic to tell someone else they need saving, esp when it’s very clear they don’t feel the same.

I think Roy meant that you weren’t arguing for the view that he found to be paternalistic.

No, actually that’s exactly what I’m suggesting. It is paternalistic to tell someone else they need saving, esp when it’s very clear they don’t feel the same.

No need to rev up the snark train. I wasn’t saying you or anyone else was calling it empowering for all. My statement empowerment was part of the bigger argument.

Of course, given everything I seen, I fail to see how it could possibly be considered empowering even for an individual, but, luckily, that’s irrelevant.

If the choice comes down to improving the conditions for all or keeping the status quo because of a personal ick factor, one could hardly make the second choice and call themselves a good person with any honesty.

If they’re not empowering, they must be demeaning. Is that the point?

If that’s the leap people are making, it’s an odd one, isn’t it? I mean, I’d wager that most jobs that most people have aren’t particularly empowering. I do program and systems analysis, and I can assure that my job is in no way “empowering”, except in-so-far as it allows me to pay my bills and put food on the table. I don’t really consider that particularly empowering, though.

I mean, I get the demeaning aspect insofar as it is – literally – patriarchy in action, but if the woman herself doesn’t think so, or doesn’t care, or whatever, is it feminism’s job to “save” her?

That does seem to be the argument that some people have. I think that gets to the brain-washing, though. The reason that some people seem to think that we have to save “those” women is precisely because they’ve been “brain-washed” by… something. The money? I don’t know. Which, I don’t know… it seems to me that it’s kind of patronizing to think that we have to “save” women from themselves. It’s a bit paternalistic.
(I gather that’s not what you’re suggesting- given your comments below, btw)

Aren’t our efforts better employe in improving the conditions so that all the workers are safer? I would like to assume that this is the “official” position. I’m getting the feeling though, that I might be wrong.

Yeah, I get that feeling, too. I mean, in a way it does seem to be the mostly “official” position. I know I see lots of people who claim that’s their priority, at least. The problem comes in, for me, when the rest of their words don’t match up with that claim. That is, you see people who’ll say that they’re concerned about the rights of sex workers, and making the industry safer, but, outside of that claim, they seem to mostly want to talk about how duped sex workers are, or how they need to be saaaaved.

Aside: Honestly, I had no idea that there was an international sex workers rights day, until I read this post.