Tuesday, December 3, 2024

Belgium grants labour rights to sex workers

I had heard that Belgium has decriminalised sex work a while ago but I couldn't find out much about it. Now there is a new law there that entitles sex workers to employment contracts, health insurance, maternity leave and sick days.

My first thought was that it's a good thing but one of the attractions of sex work for many women is that usually they don't have to work fixed hours. Most sex workers don't want to work 40 hours every week. They might want to work 20 hours one week and none the next.

Sex workers who choose to work in brothels don't have that flexibility and can benefit from these new laws. How many women will choose employment contracts is another matter. They say that in Germany women can have employment contracts but few have chosen to do this. Germany certainly isn't the way forward in these matters: I have read so many bad things about what happens in Germany.

A great benefit to brothel workers is that they will have the right to refuse clients, choose their practices and stop an act at any moment. This is something that independent sex workers have always been able to do and is very important. If a sex worker dislikes old men she should be able to refuse them. If a sex worker doesn't want to provide oral sex without a condom she should be able to say no.

I was listening to The Global Story on BBC World Service. One issue discussed was the issue of panic buttons. The new law states that employers must provide them. A critic said "In what other job would you need a panic button?". However, in many professions women especially need to be protected.

 There are many ways that estate agents protect themselves from attack. First on this list is Screen Clients Prior To Meeting  (it also says that half carry self-defense weapons). Third on this list is Have a “Panic Button” in Your Pocket.

In the programme someone from Canada called Andrea said that she used to be a sex worker. She decided to set up her own brothel and run it on ethical lines. Having tried this, she stopped doing it because she realised that it is impossible to avoid harm. She apologised to the women.

I wanted to find out more about Andrea from Canada. She is Andrea Heinz and she has numerous writings on the Nordic Model Now! site and the FeministCurrent site. They are too numerous for me to go through but I read one of them. In it she wrote that she sold her brothel to somebody else. So she was a pimp and she sold her brothel. Nothing about apologising to the women.

The example that Andrea gave in her writing of harm is 'I saw a girl come out of a room crying because her client was in his 70s and had been “touching her like an incestual grandpa.”' This is odd because if this 'girl' disliked old men why didn't she decide not to accept this client? Why did Andrea not tell the 'girl' that she didn't have to accept any client she disliked? If she was being so ethical.

Why did Andrea not understand that in Belgium women now have the right to refuse clients? Why is Andrea telling everyone that the new Belgian laws won't protect women? She's on YouTube too, being interviewed by Christian bigot Benjamin Nolot - who doesn't believe in abortion rights or gay marriage.

In the book Paid For by Rachel Moran she says that a 'madam' she worked for told her she didn't have to do anything she didn't want to. Rachel didn't have anal sex when she was a sex worker. So I'm not inclined to believe Andrea Heinz when she writes she was 'violently sodomised' with 'my genitals and anus were left torn and bleeding'. She also wrote that she has been raped numerous times without condoms.

It could be that prostitution in Canada is different from prostitution in Ireland (especially before 1993). Maybe Canada is like America in terms of violence whereas Ireland is like Europe. If that is the case why are we asking a Canadian ex pimp what she thinks of new laws in Belgium?

There is a contradiction in this piece. She wrote that she specialized in domination because she would not need to have intercourse as often. Yet later in the same piece she wrote "The day I received my first legitimate paycheck I broke down sobbing because it was the first bit of money I’d earned in the previous seven years where I didn’t have to lay on my back and spread my legs". Not only had she previously earned money as a dominatrix, she had also earned money as a pimp.

She wrote that she earned (in seven years) over $1.2 million. That's interesting, because the abolitionists are always keen to tell us that the women see very little of the money handed over. While she was a sex worker she 'pursued post-secondary education and was on owner of a comfortable starter home (as a single woman under 30)'.

'I now had a large mortgage, tuition costs, and vehicle replacements.' This is what 'trapped' her in prostitution. Apparently being violently sodomised on a regular basis isn't enough of an incentive to forgo the house, cars etc. Or maybe she had moved on by this point to letting other females be violently sodomised for her money. Or maybe this is just some kind of sick fantasy dreamed up by an Evangelical based on what they think happens in prostitution.

I think that the Evangelicals like Benjamin Nolot (founder of Exodus Cry) and Radical Feminists like Meghan Murphy (founder of Feminist Current) would have preferred it if she hadn't mentioned the $1.2 million, or the house, college and cars. Also, 'what I earned in two weeks could have been earned in four hours through prostitution'. I'm assuming she means being a sex worker and not being a pimp, but it can be difficult to work out what she really means.

The funny thing about the Andrea Heinz story is that it isn't going to discourage women from entering prostitution. They would quite like the $1.2 million, the house, the cars and the college fees. They know that under certain circumstances they won't be violently sodomised. They can turn away clients, choose what they want and don't want to do, and stop a sex act. They can have security.

Andrea Heinz doesn't want them to have labour rights. She might say that panic buttons and security guards won't stop them from being raped anally. Yet Rachel Moran never had anal sex once. If you don't want it you can not do it. Unless someone tries to stop you having rights. Maybe someone who doesn't want you to have the right to a same-sex marriage or an abortion.

I can understand that some people will say it would be better to eliminate prostitution. That's not going to happen. If anyone says that it has happened in Sweden, they are not telling you the truth.


No comments: