17 comments on “Timmyu elsewhere

  1. I don’t believe that only 44 prostitutes are “registered with the national insurance scheme”. Which scheme is this?

    This sounds like a fake number being used to justify legislation. Being a cash business there will be widespread evasion of tax and social security payments, but not that much – the authorities are better at enforcement than that.

    Also, if this “national insurance scheme” really is health insurance, they don’t routinely collect information on your profession, and many whores will give something else.

    So either this is some specific, whores guild insurance scheme that very few are interested in joining, or it represents the tiny handful of out and proud whores who have shared the details of their profession with their health insurer.

    I don’t believe for a minute that only 44 tarts are paying health insurance, let alone only 44 are earning enough to be obliged to pay it.

  2. Low wages might also mean lower demand. Online porn is instantly available at no cost and with no risk of picking up a nasty disease.

    Or perhaps just low *declared* wages; easily achieved in a cash business.

  3. Just as a general comment, a little bit of “social” history here to remind us that the characterisation of prostitution as slavery, as is currently being touted as an exciting new discovery by determined investigators is just a (slight) rebranding of the first Progressive Era’s “White Slavery” campaign.

    A New Conscience And An Ancient Evil
    -by the doyenne of the Social Purity grand dames, Jane Addams, almost exactly a century ago in 1912.

  4. I don’t believe that only 44 prostitutes…

    it’s probably because the other 249,956 have been trafficked and are manacled in the back rooms of nail bars.

  5. IanB,

    This CEOP report, which actually has nail bars as the money laundering mechanism rather than the destination, coupled with general stupidity and the refusal to check anything as inconvenient as facts, leading to this (paywall) and then this.

    At a vaguely cynical guess.

  6. Why is everyone hear referring to these women as “tarts” and “whores”? That’s a bit disrespectful.

  7. Not only disrespectful, but also bad politics I’d have thought. If ever anyone here (i.e. Tim) is asked to justify decriminalising prostitution the prodnose authoritarian puritans will use these remarks to suggest that the classical liberals don’t care about the welfare of these people and therefore the liberal view should be disregarded.

  8. Led125-

    That’s an interesting point, but the question then becomes what word to use. It’s worth remembering that many of our most popular words were once derogatory- tory, whig, hippie, gay, individualist even. The question is whether you stop using the word because it’s an insult, or reclaim it with a positive connotation.

    The only vaguely positive words are “courtesan” and “escort”, the latter of which not only makes one think of naff motor vehicles of yesteryear but is overly euphemistic. As is the first, come to that. “Prostitute” is a ghastly ugly word.

    “Whore” on the other hand has a certain bawdiness to it, as does “tart”. I can see either of them, particularly the first, reclaimed with a positive association, like “gay”. Whenever I use it, it’s not with a negative intention.

  9. Ian B – I’ve heard the term “sex worker” used, but prostitute also seems acceptable (as in “The English Collective for Prostitutes”).

    “Whore” very well could be reclaimed, but if so it cannot be reclaimed by us (I am assuming we’re all white males here). In the meantime it strikes me as a ghastly word to use.

    Let’s face it, prostitutes are the main victims of this country’s puritan and authoritarian laws. I don’t think we should use terms that serve to denigrate them, whatever our intentions.

    And even if you still think its okay to use then fine. I can’t force you to call them something else. Just remember that its certainly bad politics. .

  10. One of the episodes of Borgen on Saturday night was rather good on this subject. It showed our heroine being persuaded that prostitution shouldn’t be banned on liberal grounds after calls for banning prostitution following raids on an brothel with illegal immigrants being held in slavery. She was convinced by someone making the liberal arguments that slavery was already illegal and you don’t need to make it more illegal and what consent8ng adults get up to is nobody else’s business.

    It also featured a whole array of “do gooders” who knew what was best for the sex workers, including shouting one down at a conference. It even had reference to an organisation, which looked very much like one of our fake charities, double counting so that they go more money.

    It was uncanny, almost like the script writers followed this and a few other liberal blogs.

  11. Has anyone else noticed the title here:

    Sex
    Timmyu elsewhere

    Doesn’t that ‘u’ on the end of ‘Timmyu’ seem faintly Romanian?

    Has our host been trafficked right under our noses?

    Is this a coded cry for help?

    Let’s go and check out the Reeperbahn!

  12. If Timmy’s been trafficked to the Reeperbahn then we need to go and save him – perhaps we could offer the traffickers a robot bottom in return?

  13. @Led125
    You’ll find women following the oldest profession are usually pretty easy going over their job description. They don’t like ambiguity. They wish you to clearly understand:

    YOU’RE PAYING FOR IT.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>