Happenings On Twitter: #C36 and Strange Bedfellows

 photo 4cf31da9-5d23-49c6-ae46-e191d9ba0665_zpsa41af634.png

Passage from Woman Hating by Andrea Dworkin, referencing Gynocide

I’ve told all of you that I’m being harassed and verbally abused on Twitter by the pro-prostitution lobby. Johns tell me I’m a cunt and send me porn for speaking the simple truth about male violence against women in the underground we call the sex industry. Today I was grilled about my time in the sex industry by a woman who I believe is still in the industry. Here’s the Storify to view.

Prostitutes tweet me with silly notions such as ‘New Zealand’ has a low trafficking rate’, as if that’s something to be proud of. Liberals incessantly tweet about the joys of unionizing women, joining them together in their suffering.

Are there some prostitutes with choice? Of course. Senator Mobina Jaffer relays on her blog the story of Taryn Onody in what she thinks is the representative of hookers everywhere. Onody wrote:

“I started ‎in the adult industry when I was 21 years of age. I grew up in the suburbs of Toronto. I’m a practicing Catholic. My parents are upper-middle class. My siblings are tax paying, working citizens. I come from a wonderful home, wonderful people, and a great upbringing. I was an over-achieving student with accelerated grades, and hold multiple post-secondary diplomas/degrees. I am the ‘girl next door’.

I started looking into sex work when I became bored with my corporate job, which ‎I had held for 5 years. I felt bored, trapped, and craving something more in my life’s experience.”

That’s the ‘happy hooker’, ready to be consumed as the product of the American dream. She’s just a highly educated religious ‘girl’ (mother/whore) who wants more, wants more dick. Onoda is the perfect woman.

She put aside her possible high earning career in order to cater to the sadomasochistic male fantasy. Men will line up to pay to punish her for being such a stupid woman who went to school, got the grades, and realized that all she’s really worth is to be fucked, repeatedly, by men.

If Mobina Jaffer wanted a true representation of male fantasy, she got just that. The reality however, is much different.

My comment truth remains in ‘moderation’ on Jaffer’s blog. It will never be approved.

AWAN, the Aborginal Women’s Action Network, has a different story, one of colonization, one of horror. Brown women are coerced and trafficked by white men to supply the demand for 14 year old girls. These ‘other’ women don’t deserve to be liberated. The pro-prostitution lobby doesn’t hear them, even as they whisper their names from the grave. They remain un-named, as un-people.

The pro-prostitution lobby will stoop to any level to get what they want, which they say is full decriminalization.

The dominatrix who wants to run a brothel, Terri Jean Bedford, one of the three women who brought the original constitutional challenge followed me on Twitter last week.  I thought it was strange but I realized the intent was to put the spotlight on me, so others could come after me, and that’s exactly what happened.

Bedford has some strange bedfellows. She’s retweeting MRA’s. She’s even retweeting MRA’s who are retweeting some of my tweets that have nothing to do with C36 but about Gamergate. MRA’s are pretty much behind the stalking, online threats, and harassment of women in gaming but hey, if it will get more people to attack me, she’s for it.


 photo 1b49f03b-718b-48bc-84dc-367fbbef4003_zps977ee5ac.png

Terri Jean Bedford retweets MRA’s

I don’t particularly care if she retweets MRA’s since she’s the one who looks foolish. MRA’s are just nuisances on Twitter anyway and most of them I’ve blocked, including the one in the picture. He loves to stalk my tweets because I blocked him and he’s butthurt about it.

The same strange alliances held true on other social media platforms. Pro-prostitution folks on video sites align themselves with male supremacist/white supremacist MRA’s because they both hate radical feminists. I’ve seen them on Twitter. It’s only a matter of time before they attack me too. No arguments, just dumb adhoms. That’s what will happen.

I’ve been accused of being an ideologue, which to me isn’t even a criticism. I have to laugh at this because everyone tweeting has ideas about this issue. Then again, I’ve not encountered one MRA or one prostitution lobbyist who can actually make a truthful argument. I had one pro-prostitution lobbyist accuse me of not seeing people as people.

I do laugh at how determined they are to make fools of themselves and they quite clearly know that the research is on my side so I suppose the only thing left is to personally attack.

I’m not the only one being attacked. Anyone who speaks positively about Bill C36 is singled out too. One common tactic is to accuse an exit program of collecting grant money from the federal government, as if that’s a crime while johns in my neighbourhood pay marginalized aboriginal women $2 measly dollars for a blowjob.

It’s a 3-ring circus. The johns, the circus masters, remain behind the curtain in the shadows. Not a single john offered to speak at either the House or Senate meetings to tell the Canadian people about the 13 year old girls they buy to re-enact violent porn scenes on and how this is their ‘right.’ In truth they don’t have to. We see their destructive wake in our nightmares, the collective women’s nightmare.

Every Valentine’s Day I hear the screams of the murdered women. Aboriginal women and other poor women march by my window so I never forget. They lost their lives so a man could have an orgasm. If anyone tells you different they’re lying.

Why is there such a divide in experience between exited women and current prostitutes? One side is lying and it’s not the survivors. When I was prostituted I thought I was awesome and in a ‘job’ too. I based my entire psyche around normalizing what I was forced to do. You have to see it as normal because it’s the only way you survive.

The stigma that lots of individuals in the sex industry talk about doesn’t come from anyone else but the johns, pimps and traffickers who coerce minor girls to serve men’s needs for sexual violence.

The problem with legalizing or decriminalizing prostitution without any culling of the demand is that it guarantees marginalized women and girls will be coerced, pimped, and trafficked to supply the demand. This is tragically simple but the prostitution lobby is in denial.

The longer we cater to this denial the longer we have to wait for women’s liberation from male violence.

Prostitution is not fun. It’s not a job. It’s an oppression. Blaming radical feminists, religious institutions and exit groups for pointing out this truth is just another way to strawman. It’s exactly what MRA’s do. It’s no wonder they’re in bed with each other.

They deserve each other.





26 thoughts on “Happenings On Twitter: #C36 and Strange Bedfellows

  1. “It’s a 3-ring circus. The johns, the circus masters, remain behind the curtain in the shadows. Not a single john offered to speak at either the House or Senate meetings to tell the Canadian people about the 13 year old girls they buy to re-enact violent porn scenes on and how this is their ‘right.’ In truth they don’t have to. We see their destructive wake in our nightmares, the collective women’s nightmare.

    Every Valentine’s Day I hear the screams of the murdered women. Aboriginal women and other poor women march by my window so I never forget. They lost their lives so a man could have an orgasm.”

    Very powerful writing, HMQ.

    • “They lost their lives so a man could have an orgasm”

      This. We all know that the only thing that men care about is orgasms. Thus, to have them these ignorant women give birth to the degenerates and die doing it, so these same degenerates could further rape and abuse women.

      Great quote by Andrea!

      I love that you cuss HMQ!

  2. Regarding the word, “ideologue,” which I’ve been called by men, too, here is the definition from Merriam-Webster online:

    noun \ˈī-dē-ə-ˌlȯg, -ˌläg\

    : someone who very strongly supports and is guided by the ideology of a particular group
    Full Definition of IDEOLOGUE
    : an impractical idealist : theorist
    : an often blindly partisan advocate or adherent of a particular ideology

    I think the Johns are speaking. All those men are Johns and abusers and liars. Men have no experience as women in prostitution – or women in any other situation (target of street harassment, for instance), so when men are talking about it with authority and calling others “ideologues.” we see a major reversal.

    Being part of the oppressed group, in this instance, a woman who has been prostituted by men, automatically makes you the opposite of an “theorist.”

    • I know. I don’t see being called an ‘ideologue’ offensive at all. Especially when I’m the one with the experience. The most harm they’ve ever experienced, according to their own wallowing, is a country that says ‘no, you can’t buy women.’ The horror of being told ‘no.’

      • Re: “The horror of being told ‘no.’”

        That’s the essence of it all.

        I’m not sure how to approach the idea (I’m still working on it… and I mean that), but I think we need to educate young women about the dangers to all of us of bringing more of these man-infants into this world.

  3. By the way, isn’t it illegal to send unsolicited pornographic images to people?

    I don’t know. Even if it is, it’s not like laws are enforced. So, it probably doesn’t really matter.

    It just doesn’t sound particularly legal.

  4. “The pro-prostitution lobby doesn’t hear them [aboriginal women], even as they whisper their names from the grave. They remain un-named, as un-people.”

    This is the part that angers me the most. For the pro-prostitution group, it’s a choice, and they don’t give a rat’s ass about anybody else. They don’t care about the missing, the trafficked, the drug addicts. Just appeasing the almighty peen.

  5. Also, Re: Witchcraft and Class.

    One of your harassers said: Women are not a class they are a sex.

    He is so wrong.

    Women are BOTH a class and a sex.

    We are the largest under-class in the world. World-wide this is the case.

    I was thinking about witchcraft in relation to under-classes of people – in other words, oppressed people.

    Among oppressed people witchcraft is rampant and it grows and becomes extremely powerful. Here in the U.S., the most powerful witchcraft is American Hoodoo. It’s a combination of the practices of three extremely oppressed groups of people: Black people; American Indians; and women of European decent.

    It’s powerful because it’s pretty much all we’ve got. The so-called justice system doesn’t work for us. So, my lawyers and advocates are on the other side. Call 911 all you want and nothing happens, but light some black candles and do certain things and – Voila! – your most terrifying enemy is behind bars and the charges start piling up.

    We use it, not because we are poor, or superstitious or uneducated but because it’s the only thing that works for us and It works so well because all those years of oppression have forced us to perfect it.

    • Hi, WOOW,

      “Women are not a class they are a sex.”

      I have thought long and hard about the question of how best to describe the group “women”. In feminist literature I have seen women called a “class” or a “caste”, and this distinction is important, I think.

      I would like to try to sort that out a little, since you bring it up.

      Yes, we’re a “sex”. That means we possess immutable biological characteristics distinguishing us from men, who are also a sex. These characteristics can’t be changed in the way that the characteristics of a member of a “class” may be. A rich man may become a poor man; many do so. But a man cannot become a woman (putting aside the trans discussion which is only tangentially relevant here, as we are talking about a scale of billions of people.)

      Woman’s position seems to me to be different from all other groups that have been historically similarly subordinated and controlled,

      1. Atomization.

      We’ve been atomized and not acted as a group because of the institution of marriage, which removed our autonomy and bound our lives to an individual dominating class member. Marriage has some similarity to African-American slavery, as there was an identifiable “inherent” characteristic for this group and members were similarly “sold” to individual dominating class members and lived out their lives attached as dependents to their masters.

      But unlike African-Americans, we have no homeland and original culture from which we were historically wrenched; we have always lived with our oppressors. This distinguishes us (along with other factors such as the differences in legal enslavement versus legal marriage) from oppressed races and ethnicities such as African-Americans, who also lived with their oppressors, but could reclaim their historicity as a distinct people with distinct historical cultures.

      2. Immutability

      On the whole the group called “women” and the group called “African-Americans” do share the fact that they are born with distinguishing characteristics which they cannot change throughout their lives. African-American women experience labeling and treatment due to both characteristics.

      There’s another kind of group possessing a distinguishing characteristic which is not biological, but which they are born into and cannot change during their lives. That group consists of people born into Into India’s caste system. As with the ruling sex, there are ruling castes.

      The lower castes cannot rise into the ruling castes except in rare instances, which is the situation also for racial and sex groups. These people share the culture of their masters, but live separately. Again, half of this group are women, who have a double socio-political disability.

      Even though there are differences, though, the group of women shares with the Untouchables of India and African-Americans a particular kind of lifelong discrimination. We’re discriminated against based on a condition we experience from birth. It is for all practical purposes unchangeable. Legal attempts to remedy this can only go so far.

      2. Scale and Universality.

      The group “Women” consists of about 3,500,000,000 members. This group transcends nations, continents, history. We’re unique as a subordinated group because of the size and scope of our oppression. It’s mind-boggling and the implications, when one considers ending our subordination, are so radical for all societies that one reaction is always denial that we are subordinated at all.

      For us, as for no other group, the question, can our subordination end, is on a unique scale. Attempts are being made country-by-country. This is a story of seeking freedom that dwarfs all other stories. Its scale and ancientness is why I’m personally convinced that women were the original oppressed group.

      Overall, I don’t think there are any single words that easily describe women’s position. “Class” can be left behind in one’s lifetime, no matter how deep class discrimination goes in a particular culture. “Caste” is closer because it can’t be left behind, but it doesn’t describe the peculiar condition of living in the household of the master.

      “Sex”, as in Beauvoir’s Second Sex, is currently seen as a biological rather than political word and I think is so overlain with other non-liberatory concepts that it is hard to make it useful. The current confusion with “gender” may help separate the word “sex” out and limit its usage again, but to say we are the subordinated sex doesn’t add much in placing us in the context of liberation theory.

      I usually end up going with “caste” which I first saw as a descriptor of the status of women in The Female Eunuch by Germaine Greer, a book written more than 40 years ago.

      Sorry about the wall of text.

  6. HMQ,

    I can’t seem to get your storify link to work.

    I just signed up there so I could read it. I don’t know much about it. But, when I click the link, I think I’m getting the editor (the page where you write your story).

  7. I think you might find this interesting, as I did.

    I ran across it at an ex-Mormon discussion board where they were talking about cult behavior and gas lighting. I think it applies to the behavior of the Johns (as well as the men who found fault with the street harassment video, MRAs and misogynists, in general). It’s called DARVO:


    Here’s the short definition from the web page:

    “DARVO refers to a reaction perpetrators of wrong doing, particularly sexual offenders, may display in response to being held accountable for their behavior. DARVO stands for “Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender.” The perpetrator or offender may Deny the behavior, Attack the individual doing the confronting, and Reverse the roles of Victim and Offender such that the perpetrator assumes the victim role and turns the true victim — or the whistle blower — into an alleged offender. This occurs, for instance, when an actually guilty perpetrator assumes the role of “falsely accused” and attacks the accuser’s credibility or even blames the accuser of being the perpetrator of a false accusation.”

  8. Not to be a pain, but I do worry about you deliberately hosting a wild mouse. They tend to live in groups and are not hygenic.

  9. Hello there,

    Although I do agree with a lot of things you express on your opinion piece “Happenings on Twitter: #C36 and Strange Bedfellows” I do have to desagree with some.
    Prostitution is said to be one of the or the oldest means to provide for women in particular, and in all these millenia things have not only not got better but probably got even worse. Women (and don’t forget also men) still turn to or are forced into prostitution and women and children are sold, abused and trafficked.
    Is it not time to decriminalised prostitution so that the women and men already selling sex can do it on their own terms and with at least some resemblance of a safety net?
    Decriminalasing prostitution should not be equal to allowing or making legal anything and everything to do with selling sex and who provides it. Traffiquing with human beings for anything SHOULD NOT EVER, coercing, forcing any human being SHOULD NOT EVER, having sex with children SHOULD NOT EVER. But that is not what decriminalization of prostitution should be for.

    There are indeed, a lot of other political, psychosocial factors playing a part and which would need to be addressed in order to solve things like human traffiquing and child prostitution. But I do think that decriminalization of prostitution would get rid at least of pimps, and provide some healthier, safer alternatives to street corner.

    • Prostitution will never be made safer. The problem is demand for it. The demand, which is mainly men, under decrim and legalization models gets larger. This means the supply must be larger and that’s when women and girls are coerced and trafficked into prostitution.

      Prostitution is built upon a foundation of inequality between men and women. There is no ‘other’ underground and it will always be inherently violent.

      The research shows this and you should look into that.

  10. Speaking of strange bedfellows, or I guess not so strange, well-known trans activists are attacking feminists as anti-sex (and talking about how they enjoy posing online in their bras because they have “great tits”).

    This is Paris Lees (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paris_Lees) writing for Vice: http://www.vice.com/read/theres-a-new-prudery-in-feminism-and-i-hate-it?utm_source=vicefbus

    And here’s Samantha Allen, a trans activist who wrote a rant on Twitter about how Samantha hates men: http://www.donotlink.com/framed?5362

    The writers post a photo in a bustier or just let readers think they are speaking as women, though right now there is heated argument between trans and some radfems and a lot of reasons why trans folk should not be seen as speaking as women in ways that may harm women or feminists.

    My take is that trashing feminists, or displaying hatred of men while making people think one was raised as a woman is grossly misleading. It screams of co-optation and insult and lack of consideration.

    Now both of these pieces have been seized by MRAs as evidence that some women are highly critical of us “non-pos” feminists, and that other women openly hate men.

    Both have been re-published by MRAs, one in the mensrights subreddit where the men are reacting approvingly to a woman trashing feminists, and the other in A Voice for Men, where the commenters are reacting to the Allen’s incitement with predictable rage.

    And here’s the kicker: Neither of the MRA sites lets on what they have to know with a simple google: that the writers were raised as men. It’s pure manipulation by both the trans activists AND the MRAs.

    • I know. AVFM tried having a transperson on their team and I wrote about this.

      As long as both groups hate radical feminists, they unite. It’s quite comical.

      Wearing a dress and putting on makeup doesn’t make you a female. Having female reproductive organs does.

  11. Re: “Liberals incessantly tweet about the joys of unionizing women, joining them together in their suffering.”

    I remember first hearing talk about unionizing strippers when I was driving through S. California. There was a whole thing about it on the radio. I thought that was just about the craziest thing I ever heard because it didn’t take our real lives into account, at all. I don’t think it’s quite so much like this anymore, but before 9/11, you could be very anonymous in the clubs, work, take home cash and keep your life very private. Nobody ever had to know who you actually were.

    A surprising number of dancers had good reasons for wanting their privacy (actually, we all did – I’ve never met a dancer who didn’t have a stalking problem). I’ve met a handful of women whose children were kidnapped as infants by men. One of my best friends’ daughters was kidnapped as an infant – as usual, law enforcement was useless. She had to pursue the kidnapper across the country and even outside the continental U.S. to get her infant daughter back from him. She lived her whole life in hiding from the kidnapper and from the system that failed her and her daughter.

    Another one of my best friends had to leave her state of origin with her baby son and go on the run because the alleged *father* of the boy tried to kill both of them. She had to live under an assumed name, which meant having a job at which she earned cash and could keep off the radar.

    Like I said, it’s much harder to do that now, but people for whom the system has not worked do not want to be *unionized* – I can’t tell you how incredibly wacky that sounds to my ears!

    These same people in CA were the first I ever heard of to talk about unionizing prostituted women and eventually began calling all of us “sex workers,” although what on earth dancing has to do with sex to anyone who isn’t a Southern Baptist is beyond my comprehension. I think it was a way to try to legitimize prostitution, make it seem not so bad, in the eyes of the public.

    I cannot tell you how much I despise the term “sex worker” – to me, it’s no different than calling me a wh0re. I do not appreciate the people who did this – presumably sex pozzies and Johns. I’ve never really known who they were, but they seem to have originated there in Californie. I never heard such crazy talk on the east coast.

  12. Thanks for this post. I hadn’t thought of the sex industry in these terms and had believed that legalization/unionization of adult prostitution would help equalize things. If you can do multiple tags – Basic Human Rights would also fit

  13. I just saw this excellent blog post by Rebecca Mott for the first time today:


    It sounds so similar to what you’ve been experiencing on Twitter and elsewhere, HMQ, very much as you describe it in this post.

    I’m surprised I didn’t see it sooner, but I think something strange has been going on with my WordPress Reader. I cleaned it out yesterday – removed all the non-rad fem blogs – and suddenly a whole bunch of posts from my favorite bloggers appeared that just weren’t there before.

    WordPress is a little quirky.

    In Rebecca’s post above she talks about how words do, in fact, hurt and the various ways that they are used to harm women. She talks about “choice” and “empowerment” as harmful words when applied to prostituted women.

    “Empowerment” is a word that has lost all practical meaning.

    “Choice” is a lie. Many times I’ve looked back at my own life and found that there were no real choices. So, this is not a meaningful word when applied to the lives of many women, in general, I think.

    To the list, I’d like to add “consent.” I’m sick to death of seeing it being used as a way to re-define rape as something other than the horrific, violent crime that it is.

    Something she mentions, also, is how inconvenient exited women seem to be to many people. I can relate to her sense that women who have been subjected to johns are wished dead by many people. I’ve often had the sense that I was supposed to be dead when I talk about the things that have happened to me at the hands of men – we are not supposed to survive and our survival is an undesirable condition to many people because we represent uncomfortable facts and truths that they don’t really want to know about it because it puts a rain cloud over their sunny view of the world and of men and especially all their Nigels. If they acknowledge us, at all, they do so condescendingly and without acknowledging the point of what we’re telling them, which is that there is a *systematic* problem that must be rooted out.


Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s