It's vanishingly rare for a large media outlet to cut through the knee-jerk emotional hysteria surrounding sexual trafficking, but The Village Voice knocks it out of the park this week.  Make sure to read Real Men Get Their Facts Straight: Ashton and Demi and Sex Trafficking.  This is probably going to end up being of my my top favorite articles of the year.  After completely destroying the bogus "there are 100,000-300,000 child sex slaves in America" myth, it goes on to look at the celebrity philanthropy industry behind the hype:

The actors were watching TV in bed when they saw a horrifying documentary about sex slavery in some faraway foreign land and decided they needed to get involved.

But how to help?

Sex trafficking is a grim problem, and not one actors know a lot about—even if Moore played a stripper in a movie and has alluded to how she was "manipulated and taken advantage of" by a 28-year-old boyfriend when she was 15 years old.

So Kutcher and Moore did what any savvy Hollywood couple would do, which is call Trevor Neilson. Neilson isn't a household name, but he's quickly establishing his Santa Monica, California-based Global Philanthropy Group as the premier charity consultant to the entertainment industry's biggest and brightest. Neilson is a former Hillary Clinton staffer and Gates Foundation director who has been the subject of glowing profiles in Details and the New York Times.

"The king of Hollywood philanthropy" and his wife and business partner, Maggie, can charge up to $200,000 a year for their services because they're the best in a new and growing industry. The concept of a celebrity charity consultant is relatively new, but it makes sense, as Hollywood grows ever more concerned about image management. Neilson is the guy Madonna called to help her save face in the debacle surrounding her failed Malawi schools.

The Neilsons cooked up a 140-point "secret sauce" plan of attack for the Demi and Ashton Foundation (known as DNA).

[...]

Getting data about sex slavery was not easy, she says: "Versus most social issues I've worked on, there is actually a dearth of data—so it was absolutely cobbled together."

Accuracy is not a major concern for Maggie Neilson.

"All of the core data we use gets attacked all the time," she says. "The challenge is, it's that or nothing, right? And I don't frankly care if the number is 200,000, 500,000, or a million, or 100,000—it needs to be addressed. While I absolutely agree there's a need for better data, the people who want to spend all day bitching about the methodologies used I'm not very interested in."

Really, go read the whole thing.  I promise you'll love it.

The sex work scene can be a fickle, catty creature when it comes to how it views non-prostitutes.  On the one hand, it says it wants to see a greater variety of sex workers involved and taking up the unifying title of "sex worker," yet it often uses the terms "sex worker" and "prostitute" interchangeably, and concerns itself almost exclusively with issues that affect prostitutes.  I've watched one woman who has ranted at me privately that porn people like myself can't possibly understand what it's like to be a real sex worker also rant publicly how it's infuriating that more porn performers don't identify as sex workers.  That two-faced approach, along with the term "sex work lite," make me bristle.

"Sex work lite" is apparently anything that doesn't involve a man putting his penis in your vagina for money (without the presence of a camera), and proponents of this concept wrongly believe that only prostitution carries real risks for those engaging in it.  (It's not just about the distance between myself and clients online.  I've even seen dominatrixes who do the penetrating with strapons dismissed as posers.)

"Sex work lite" is bullshit, and not just because it's divisive, but because with porn, it's flatly untrue.  Porn has only been established as legal to produce in the state of California - otherwise, it's mostly just tolerated, like jaywalking.  Porn people are at risk of being charged with bigger crimes that carry bigger prison sentences and bigger fines, at both the local and federal level.  So, how exactly is it that people like me can't possibly understand what it means to engage in work that involves risks?  Granted, I am very unlikely to be physically attacked by any of my customers, but I make less money than I would if I were a prostitute, and I am more likely to go to federal prison and face hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines if some prosecutor in Kentucky wants to make a name for himself by alleging that my porn is obscene.  Every type of sex work has its own set of risks and rewards, and no one is immune from potential problems.

Earlier this month, a couple in Florida was arrested for operating a small porn site from the privacy of their own home.  Kimberly Kupps and her husband had their legal names and home address splattered across the news, and are currently fundraising to fight the charges.  According to a local paper,

[The husband] was booked on six counts each of wholesale promotion of obscene material and distribution of obscene material, a misdemeanor.

[Kimberly Kupps] was booked on six counts each of selling obscene material and distributing obscene material, both misdemeanors. She was also charged with the felony wholesale promotion of obscene material.

There's not a lot of details in the news, but it seems like the conservative police department "received a tip" that the couple were making porn.  The police, with no other crimes to solve and nothing better to do, then paid to join the website, establishing "proof" that the couple was selling porn - not unlike how police set up stings and entrapments of other kinds of sex workers.  The couple's web site is currently offline, which might have been their only form of income.

I could be the person in Kimberly's shoes right now.  I also run a porn site from the privacy of my own home, and while I choose to live in a big city of atheists and stoners who are less likely to lynch me, I could still be charged in a conservative small town, since my work is online.  (How many prostitutes have been prosecuted in Utah for giving a blowjob in Manhattan?  Making porn - online or mail-order video - means there is no such thing as counting on living in a tolerant city to save you, as your alleged crimes are federal once porn crosses state lines.)

I hope that my readers who have some money to spare will chip in on the Kimberly Kupps Legal Defense Fund.  She is just one example of the very real risks faced by non-prostitute sex workers.  From the web site:

Kimberly Kupps needs your help! She does not possess the financial wherewithal to fight the unlimited resources of the State, funded through tax dollars. She has hired Lawrence Walters, Esq., of Walters Law Group, along with Kelley Collier, Esq., an experienced Polk County criminal trial lawyer, to defend her in this case. Although some legal time will be donated to defending this case on a pro bono basis, Ms. Kupps will be required to expend substantial funds on court costs, expert witnesses, and attorneys' fees as the case progresses.

Kimberly has supported Free Speech rights and the erotic entertainment industry for years. She now asks for support from those of you who are in a position to help.

Thanks to the help of some wonderful writing volunteers, SWAAY.org launched this afternoon!  Please check that out and refer people to it if they're new to sex work politics.  Cheers to volunteers Rocket, Danny Wylde, Maggie McNeill, Audacia Ray, Mindy Chateauvert, Megan Andelloux, and Goddess Helena.

I kept the mission statement short and sweet:

SWAAY's mission is simple: to grow the American sex workers' rights movement through real public outreach and providing accessible information about sex work to general audiences.

I started the project mostly by putting expenses for it on a credit card, so if you'd like to help take the site from in debt to actually having money to do outreach, consider making a donation or buying some SWAAY merchandise.  Like these awesome stickers that you can put up everywhere:

If you want to thank me personally for all the time I've put into coordinating this, I always love gifts from my wishlist.

anti-sex worker activist antī seks wərkər aktəvist
noun

Defintion: Based on Christianity's "hate the sin, love the sinner" concept, anti-sex worker activists brand themselves as not opposed to the people they malign and attack, but merely their unacceptable choices.  Anti-sex worker activists express their support of sex workers by lobbying to make their jobs less safe, shutting down the places they work, and making them more fearful of arrest and imprisonment.

Usage: When Bill ran a campaign to shut down a local strip club and put dozens of people out of work, he made sure to always say he was on the side of those workers.  Bill didn't understand why one of them, upon being evicted from her apartment after the success of his campaign, called him an "anti-sex worker activist" rather than thanking him for all his hard work to make her life better.

"I'm against sex work, but I'm not against sex workers."

It's the get-out-of-jail-free-card of many feminists, religious campaigners, and other protectionists.  They support us!  They acknowledge our choices!  They see us as real people!  And they can't wait to show their loving solidarity with us by putting us in jail, taking away our income, and making our jobs as dangerous as possible.

It's such an astoundingly hypocritical argument, it leaves me stunned every time I see it.  That's why I refuse to buy into their de-personalization propaganda that insists on a vast separation between destroying the porn industry and impacting the people who work in porn, or pushing the police to conduct raids on places of prostitution and affecting the lives of people engaged in prostitution. They see nothing odd about trying to have it both ways: being the heroic would-be saviors of the fallen with one hand, and with the other, the cause of the fallen's increasing unhappiness.  They're the abusive boyfriend who brings you flowers after giving you a black eye.

While I'll use terms like "anti-porn activist" when I want to be specific, by and large, I use the phrase "anti-sex worker activism" to describe the religious/political movement to attack sex workers by calling for further criminalization of their lives.  I'd like to see more people adopt this language, because it's important to not play into the anti's strategic disinformation campaign that swears it's possible to take away sex worker's livelihoods, and even imprison them, without affecting them as people.  We all know this is a lie, so let's stop letting their language frame the debate.

There's no other social movement I can think of, other than overtly religious conversion campaigns, where activists insist on "loving the sinner."  Anti-fur protesters don't dump red paint on storefronts while holding banners that say "We love furriers and mink farmers!  We're here to help them find different careers!"  Women's shelters don't have mission statements that say, "We're here to support men that batter and rape their wives.  Our mission is to help those men by providing a place for their partners to hide from them, and legal resources for those women to file charges against them to put them in prison for a long time."  It sounds pretty stupid, doesn't it?

Don't let anti-sex worker activists keep playing this intellectually dishonest game.  Their public personas rely on being seen as saviors of sex workers who are here to fight for the humans trapped in the sex industry, but it needs to be confronted that they are working against the expressed wishes of sex workers, they are negatively impacting our lives, and that there's no such thing as "supporting" sex workers by making our lives difficult and dangerous.  Their language seeks to discuss sex work as concepts and theories, we need to use language that shows how deeply personal and non-abstract sex work is to sex workers.

 

After the initial basic questions in part one of my survey, I asked people to spend approximately 10 minutes looking at one of four sex workers' rights web sites which I considered good and/or reasonably popular.  I picked two blog-based sites, and two static sites. These were:

Bound Not Gagged, a blog covering all areas of sex work
Blog of Pro-Porn Activism, which focuses just on porn industry issues
SWOP USA, the US's primary/most visible sex workers' rights activist group
Network of Sex Work Projects, an internationally-focused site

If you're not already somewhat familiar with them, I'd suggest checking these sites out yourself before reading their reviews.  I don't want anyone to feel like I'm trashing their web site because I posted someone else's criticism.  (I don't agree with all criticisms, either, they are only the views of the survey-takers.)  I believe that these reviews contain some universal lessons for any webmaster/designer/author of a sex workers' rights web site.

As with part one of my survey, many respondents' answers were similar and I combined/paraphrased them into single list items for ease of reading.

The basic complaints I kept reading across most sites and most reviews?  "Preaching to the choir," poorly organized, hard to navigate, no introduction or basic information, hard to find information on local groups in one's own area, no call to action or information about how to help.  Most reviews of the blog-based sites include complaints about how blogs are not a good format for organizing, reading, and presenting information to audiences.  I agree with that, (I'm running swaay.org as a non-blog static site), but I was surprised how much anti-blog sentiment other people also have.  Another surprise for me was how many people wanted/expected these sites to have a breakdown of every country's, state's, and city's laws that pertain to sex workers.

Bound Not Gagged

Did this web site answer your questions about sex workers rights?  Why or why not?

(Mostly "yes," with praise about what a wide variety of material is covered.)

- Covers a range of viewpoints, shows the diversity of sex work.
- Many reports that the blog format made it hard to find information.
- The site is clearly-written and has a strong message.
- Great content that answers questions and brings up many important issues.

What do you think should have been on the web site, but wasn't?

(The general commentary is that the site is sorely lacking in organization.)

- Specific information on the current status of campaigns around the country.
- Doesn't really cover rural areas, only urban.
- Health and legal resources.
- The "bust tracker" has not been updated in ages.
- Links to lousy news stories so sex workers and allies can go comment on them.
- Menus and a way to navigate the site, like sections focused on certain areas.
- A section to keep an eye on the anti-trafficking movement.
- Resources besides just links to other blogs.
- More research and academic works.
- Information on pending and current legislation and legal battles.
- Bios and information on the site's authors, a way to read the blog by author.
- Information on what people can do to help change things. ("There was an article about violence against queer and transgender sex workers, but no information on helping victims of this violence. I think that was what was missing, a way to be involved.")
- A way to find local resources.

What was the most appealing or interesting part of the web site?

- The vast collection of information, so many good topics.
- Multiple contributors to the site with various perspectives.
- Links to other blogs and web sites.
- Active comments section that's just as good or better than the articles.
- The site isn't afraid to discus forced prostitution and other sad realities.
- Discussion of abuses aren't framed as titillating reads, which is what the mainstream media does.
- A worldwide perspective.

What did you dislike?

- Difficult to navigate, poorly organized, cluttered.
- The site uses a blog format.
- Generic template, doesn't look serious/professional.
- Twitter feeds.
- Needs a way for new people to be introduced to the issues so they can understand the content.
- The audience is an echo chamber, seems to be targeted just at sex workers.
- It would be nice to have more positive articles with good news.
- Dated links, broken links, stale RSS feeds, stuff from 2009 on the front page.
- "Disruptive commenters are allowed to continue their disruption for too long... He/she was allowed to post long after everyone's patience withered."

Any other comments?

- The site should solicit debate from both sides.
- "Maybe I am Internet-old-fashioned but I don't think every site should be in the format of a blog."

* * *

Blog of Pro-Porn Activism

Did this web site answer your questions about sex workers rights?  Why or why not?

(Overall answer: "No" most of the time.)

- The blog doesn't make arguments in support of porn, but attacks anti-porn campaigns.
- The site has a negative tone that focused on bashing others.
- Only appeals to people in the porn industry, not curious outsiders.
- No place to go to answer newbie questions or get background info.
- The tone assumes you already agree with the site's pro-porn views.
- Pieces are too long and it's hard to find bite-sized things to read.
- The blog format makes it hard to navigate.
- No answers to basic information or an introduction.
- Issues presented without backstory and context. ("I felt like I was coming into a conversation midway." "I felt like I was entering a conversation in the middle.")
- The site is not concerned with sex workers' rights, just concerned with supporting the porn industry.
- Good links to other resources, including opposition viewpoints.
- Too much talk about Shelley Lubben without explanation about why she's important.
- Hard to get a feel for the site without spending hours reading and clicking around.

What do you think should have been on the web site, but wasn't?

(Almost every respondent asked for some type of mission statement or information about why the blog exists and what it's trying to accomplish or convey. People couldn't tell what the blog is trying to do or if it's calling on the reader to do something.)

- A less aggressive tone.
- Basic facts about porn.
- A more unifying feel about what the blog is trying to convey.
- Fewer similar posts on the same topic.
- Concise coverage of recent news rather than long pieces.
- Summaries of sites alongside links, rather than just tons of links without explanation what they are.
- Information about who is behind the blog and info about its authors.
- Clearer, more concise writing that makes a post's subject apparent more quickly.
- Should be a web site, not blog.
- Medical and legal advice.
- More ways to get involved and do things for porn performers.
- More about laws and (pending) legislation.
- Historical information.

What was the most appealing or interesting part of the web site?

(Almost everyone says the links/blogroll.)

- Impressive lists of links and resources.
- Useful to have links divided into "us" and "them" for various perspectives.
- Personal perspectives from people entrenched in the industry who know - what they're talking about.
- Tons of content to keep someone busy reading for a long time.
- Detailed and thorough posts.
- Info on the condom debate in porn and how condom use could be enforced.

What did you dislike?

("Too long" was used at least once in almost every review of this site.)

- Site tone was negative, catty, and one-sided.
- Pieces are way too long, can be rambly.
- The blog format makes finding things difficult.
- No FAQ, basic info, or introduction.
- Typos and writing errors.
- Blog formatting errors that made content bleed/overlap into other sections.
- Too much focus on Shelley Luben.
- Video embedding problems.
- Site design, too much pink.
- Authors don't seem willing to acknowledge any problems in the porn industry.
- "I tend not to think of infrequently-updated blogs as a reliable source of information I can count on."
- Broken links and out-of-date information.
- Abbreviations and terms that non-insiders wouldn't know.
- Too many long quotes of outside sources.

Any other comments?

- Would like to see info on the money involved in porn, and who gets what.
- Blog only covers the US, not good for European readers.
- Looks great for people involved in porn, but hard for outsiders trying to learn.
- Great with news and current events, bad with basic information.

* * *

SWOP USA

Did this web site answer your questions about sex workers rights?  Why or why not?

(Mixed results, mostly "yes" and "somewhat.")

- Should have more in-depth information.
- Would like more resources on where sex workers can find each other for support/networking.
- The site seems only concerned with prostitutes, not all forms of sex work.
- Site seems to only be about female sex workers, assumes all sex workers are women.
- Too many sad stories on horrors of sex work.
- Front page is confusing.
- Overly broad "sex worker news" that includes press releases about new cock rings from AVN.
- Good explanation of how SWOP came to be.
- Accessible language and easy-to-read writing.
- Site looks backwards at history more than looking forward and encouraging new things.
- Site is easy to navigate and well-organized.
- Site doesn't explain what people can do to help and get involved.
- No basic information on the issues for outsiders and first-time readers.

What do you think should have been on the web site, but wasn't?

- Links to local resources and state-by-state info.
- An FAQ.
- An explanation of what "sex work" means.
- A more prominent mission statement or introduction.
- "The first page needs to immediately answer the question 'Why should I care?'"
- Educational videos like what SWOP Chicago produces.
- Interactive features like social media and Twitter feeds.
- Information on how allies can help and get involved.
- Issues that sex workers face other than just violence.
- Hard data and numbers, such as what the government wastes policing sex workers.
- Explanation of why there's violence/discrimination against sex workers, root causes rather than just sad stories.
- "More ways to support the cause other than starting a local chapter--ways for people like me, who are strapped for time and money, to contribute in smaller ways that will still make some sort of difference."
- An explanation of what things need to be done, and why.
- "Case studies/examples of sex workers who have been the victims of violence or persecution and how the group helped them or works to help them."
- More coverage of SWOP in the news.

What was the most appealing or interesting part of the web site?

(Most people though the "understanding legislation" was the best part of the site.)

- News.
- Chapter information and local groups.
- Lots of information.
- Good navigation.
- Covers things outside the US, even though it's a US-centric site.

What did you dislike?

(About half of the gripes were about the site's appearance, not its content.)

- Site is directed at sex workers, not much for allies/outsiders.
- Too many stories of women being murdered, needs more inspiring/victory stories.
- Latest document in the legal section is from 1996.
- Site could use editing, it has typos and sentences that seem to be cut off.
- The site has a good report on decriminalization, but it's over ten years old.
- Color scheme, too feminine and pink.
- "Cutesy"/"tacky"/"cheesy" graphics that makes the site look less serious.
- The sexy girl graphic on donate button bothered multiple people.
- No information on how to work to actually decriminalize sex work.
- Lack of photos or tasteful graphics to break up the text.
- No social media or web 2.0 features.
- Hasn't been updated in months, unclear when it's been updated.
- Lack of input from men, seems to only talk about women in sex work.
- "I thought it was a bit weird that there seemed to be a 'fiction' section amongst the blogs."
- Site design is plain, non-professional looking.

Any other comments?

- Site needs information telling people what they can do (vote, donate, publicize, petition).
- Many comments that the site focuses too much on violence/abuse/slavery.

* * *

Network of Sex Work Projects

Did this web site answer your questions about sex workers rights?  Why or why not?

(About half "yes." Most comment on how well-organized it is.)

- The site needs a summary/introduction of goals.
- It takes a bit of reading since there's no concise overview, but there's lots of info that makes things clear.
- The site assumes you're a sex workers' rights activist or already knowledgeable.
- High-level and addressed at NGOs, not for a casual reader.
- Academic and dry, though thorough.
- Rights statement based on European Declaration of Human Rights, rather than American or developing country's rights laws. Why base things from a European view?
- Comprehensive site, good presentation.
- One complaint that outside of western countries, there's no point in trying to accomplish legal changes for sex workers because the rule of law is haphazard in developing countries.
- The site encourages a more global perspective and networking.
- The site seems to compile other groups' news and resources, serving as a hub rather than producer of its own materials.
- The site seems to only mean "prostitute" when it says "sex worker."
- It's good that it mentions trans sex worker issues.

What do you think should have been on the web site, but wasn't?

- More news, last bit was a couple of months old.
- Resources for sex workers to connect to each other locally.
- A way for people to get involved, such as an ability to look up your nearest group.
- More information broken down by region, such as list of laws by locations.
- Info on how to organize in favor of legalization/decriminalization.
- The tone of the site is distant and dry and could use more personal voices. ("The focus really seemed to be on the orgs and not their members.")
- Site could use graphics or photos.
- Local organization links are too buried in the site.
- "I did a keyword search for "ally" and got no results!"
- Summaries of what's being done to fight for sex workers' rights.
- "More information about underage workers and how to stop it."
- The actual legal codes that apply to sex workers and links to case law around the world.

What was the most appealing or interesting part of the web site?

- Much praise for having good design, professional-looking, well-organized.
- Consistent imagery and branding, visually attractive.
- Multi-language support.

What did you dislike?

- Lots of complaints of it being too hard find a group in your own area or local information. ("For an organization that wants to be an international umbrella, it was pretty tough to find any way to link down to something local that I could act on, if I chose." "Very Global oriented - but I think people are more interested in regional info.")
- Red text seems pushy.
- "I wish there was more 'human' elements on the site. I don't feel like it is really connecting people with other people."
- Dry tone and academic, probably not accessible to average people, not for casual readers.
- The search function of the site didn't work well.
- Doesn't look good on a mobile device.
- "As a site, it's missing an opportunity to invite me in as a participant, helper, funder, activist, etc."

Any other comments?

- The Twitter feed keeps thing fresh, has lots of up-to-date information.
- Conservation is one-directional, no way to participate.
- "Why do almost all sex worker websites use a red, black, and white color scheme?"