notanan2 I don't know why you are posting something I have acknowledged as failing. I said the problem is no one asks the experts- the women working-what would be best. Imagine if all the traffic legislation was made by someone who had never seen a car. Read what the prostitutes say.
Even one of the most prolific "happy hooker" public figures, the author of belle de jour, says her self that prostitution has led her to being unable to maintain relationships outside of the sex work world e.g. with family or childhood friends.
And actually, despite the fluffy TV adaptations, her writings and interviews arent always much of an advertisement for the idea of the "happy hooker"..
That's a complete fallacy. Some sex workers may be abused some may have Stockholm syndrome but some just want to do it and by not acknowledging that, you tie those women into the very damaging concept that they are all victims, that they are somehow less valuable and therefore they do not deserve proper protection. Insisting women are victims only perpetuates and encourages abuse.
They deserve proper options. Routes back to decent employment and housing. And earlier intervention A "choice" is only as good as the available options
I agree with notanan2 who refers to the reality, that many former sex workers have nothing good to say about sex work. As others have pointed out, attempts to introduce safe working spaces didn’t work. It’s dangerous to the physical and mental health of the women involved. To say that those of us who don’t see sex work as a positive choice are expressing a moral value , ie looking down on sex workers just isn’t borne out by comments I’ve seen here.
The whole "sex positive" happy hooker theory just passes the buck away from the men As if prostitution exista because its women who want it to, and men are the ones just obliging..
I've never understood why so many women take the view that men aren't in control of their sexual urges. That if wives won't do what their husbands expect, its perfectly ok for the husband to pay a woman to fulfil a need that may cause physical or emotional harm
Iam I’ve never understood why so many women are misogynistic. Accepting that other women can ‘service’ their husbands for them is yet another manifestation of this.
Its feminism for men, pro prostitution, pro porn, etc. You would think people would notice when men support this form of 'female empowerment' so enthusiastically, strange they have never been so vocal about other campaigns such as equality of housework or caring roles for women.
I don't care for Robbie Williams or his wife, I think he us artrogant and coarse, he belongs to that group of people where money buys them anything. I think Surrogacy is wrong on a lot of levels. How can you carry a child and just give it up. Every day of my life I would miss it, wonder if he/she was being treated right, no amount of money would pay for what I had lost. however, that's just my opinion, it's not against the law, except of nature.
Surrogate!!!!! Not such a bad thing i offered and would have gone through with having a child for my little sister who for many years could not conceive she had one just one!! try booked for ivf but mercifully for her and dh fell pregnant and conceived naturally that was 10 years ago i offered again if they wanted a sibling for son and she said she was happy with the one and if it happened again it was a blessing but no more have arrived so in some cases it is a good thing
Robbie and his wife explained after their second child convinced naturally she had a lot of gynecology problems and it was not advisable for her to grt pregnant again As they wanted more children and had used this woman before that they had formed a relationship with it was natural to use her again The baby will be well loved and cared for that all that matters