The men who rent the inside of women’s bodies
Julie Bindel on charity organizations and prostitution:
Just when I thought my opinion of pro-prostitution lobbyists could not get any lower, I see a tweet by one about the Oxfam scandal: “Buying sex from professionals is not sexual misconduct and women in Haiti may well have been glad to get the sex work. I hate prissy Establishment fiddle-faddle implying ‘development’ workers are ethical puritans or saints.”
There you have it. The idea that the women involved in prostitution in Haiti are somehow benefiting from being bought and sold by the very men that are supposed to be helping them cope with their hellish existence.
Let us consider what this person is defending. Oxfam’s country director in Haiti, Roland van Hauwermeiren, admitted using prostituted females at premises paid for with charitable funds. Children may well have been among those abused by van Hauwermeiren and other aid workers. This happened after the earthquake in 2010, which killed 220,000 people, injured 300,000 and left 1.5 million homeless.
So naturally the women among those 1.5 million people left homeless must have been delighted to “get the sex work” – i.e. get a little cash from Oxfam workers in exchange for being raped.
Wherever there is conflict, natural disasters and dire poverty, women and children will be abused into prostitution. Traffickers target countries such as Haiti, knowing that there will be rich pickings, because women and girls will be additionally vulnerable.
I have witnessed scandals like this before. In 1999, during my first trip to Kosovo, shortly after the end of the war, I was told by my driver that a number of brothels were being built close to the area inhabited by a number of charities and UN organisations, because so many of the men stationed there were prolific prostitute users. I saw a number of men going in and out of these establishments, despite the fact that many of them were there to advise local law enforcers on anti-trafficking strategies.
This is why we can’t have equality; it’s because people who have the upper hand aren’t going to give it up. Poverty and desperation=cheap and compliant labor, which includes “sex workers.” Slumps and natural disasters are good things for the people on top, because there are so many more desperate people to exploit.
The sex trade is built on colonialism and racism, as well as misogyny. Whether it is the overrepresentation of African American girls and women in prostitution in the US, or the targeting of indigenous and native women and girls in countries such as Australia, New Zealand and Canada, it is clear that rich, powerful, white men consider it their “right” to use such women and girls as commodities.
Oxfam is supposed to put vulnerable women and children at the centre of its efforts, and yet some of the organisation’s most senior male officials appear to have done the opposite. It is nothing short of a disgrace that prostitution apologists somehow create a defence of these vile sexual predators by suggesting that the women and girls lured into the sex trade are somehow making a “choice”, and are “professionals” doing a “job”. These women and girls are being abused and exploited by men who are paid huge salaries to make their lives less horrendous.
One of the myths about the sex trade is that the men who rent the inside of women’s bodies for their one-sided sexual pleasure are somehow doing a favour to their victims because money changes hands. As my close friend and colleague, the formidable writer and sex trade survivor Rachel Moran, has said in response to white liberals who claim paying for sex is defensible because it provides an income to poor women: “Wouldn’t you say, if a person cannot afford to feed themselves, the appropriate thing to put in their mouth is food, not your cock?”
Wouldn’t you?
I do not wish to defend the actions of any of the men involved here, but I am worried by talk of defunding Oxfam. Oxfam does vital work. When the child abuse within churches was revealed, was there talk of defunding those churches? I don’t remember it.
There’s no arguing with that final quote.
As a long-time supporter of several charities that respond to humanitarian crises, I am sickened to think that I have contributed to such thouroughly reprehensible abuses.
David – People left the church in droves, so yes, there was plenty of talk of defunding and desupporting.
I’ve been wanting to get more involved in humanitarian work for a long time, and am going to a ‘career fair’ in two weeks–am now thinking I should be even more motivated to do so, as it’s now abundantly clear the whole sector needs more women in senior/directorial positions.
guest, I can think of no sector of the economy, public or private, that doesn’t.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again. If something is inherently illegitimate to ask for in the first place – and I certainly think using women as the living equivalents of inflatable dolls falls into that category – then no amount of bought consent (in retrospect) is ever going to change that. There is no possible future in which pimps and johns exist while harmful and degrading attitudes about women don’t. Oh, and calling opposition to prostitution “whorephobia” is like calling opposition to slavery “slavephobia”.
Seconded. Earth needs more women in senior/directorial positions. Can’t imagine they could do any worse than we men have. Not a high bar to clear, but sometimes it feels like there’s nowhere to go but up. Sure you get the “what about Margaret Thatcher and Indira Gandhi?” crowd, but just think of the thousands (more likely millions) of women over the course of human history whose contributions to the betterment of the world were ignored, belittled or stolen, let alone the countless others who were shunted away, harassed, bullied or murdered before they could contribute at all. If men were to step aside and let women assume the power that has been denied them for thousands of years, we would likely have a better future to live in than we’re likely to have under the current systems and structures. Maybe men should just fuck off and get the hell out of the way. We should stand back for a century or two, or a couple of millennia say, and let women have the same degree of power and control that men have enjoyed and exploited since forever. Maybe I’m naive, but I don’t think women would be as hatefully exclusionary as men have been: that would take a lot of effort. I think they would be more likely to share than men have (not that that would be hard). (Aid and development money put into the hands of women and girls in communities in “developing countries” is shown to go farther and helps more people than money given to men. I would love to see this scaled up to a global level). Is this “gender essentialism?” I dunno. Don’t care either. I’d be willing to give it a try. I think we’d all be the better off for it, men included.
Well, at least two women were involved in the Oxfam situation–one reported it, with no results, and one seems to have ignored it.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/oxfam-whistleblower-begged-staff-to-act-on-allegations-amid-claims-sexual-harassment-was-rife-in-a3765101.html
YNNB? I’m inclined to agree that it’s high time women had a go, and that we probably couldn’t do much worse than what we’ve seen so far, and that both men and women would find ourselves better off…but I think all of us are inclined to abuse power, to think of ourselves first, and to be blinded by confirmation bias and self-interest. Women do tend to act more responsibly, pay more attention to the stated mission of the organisations we’re involved in, and behave more empathetically and cooperatively…but we also need to bear in mind that one reason women tend to behave better when in powerful positions is that we’re not allowed to get away with the kind of crap routinely accepted from men.
It gets worse: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/02/12/oxfam-scandal-deepens-allegations-sex-aid-abuse-charity-shops/
Exchanging aid for sex, sexual abuse of child volunteers left alone in Oxfam’s UK shops with adult volunteers, including managers, who hadn’t had criminal checks, complaints dismissed or covered up by senior Oxfam managers, the Charity Commission and the Home Office.
Christ!
This humanitarian ‘career fair’ I’ll be attending is certainly likely to be more interesting now…’so, just so I know, what are the rape statistics in YOUR organisation?’
Ugh, van Hauwermeiren already spotted for abusing locals during an incident in Chad in 2006.