Slashdot Mirror
New Child Protection Nonprofit Strikes Back At Sex-Negative Approach of FOSTA-SESTA (youcaring.com)
qirtaiba writes: When the FOSTA-SESTA online sex trafficking bill passed last month, it sailed through Congress because there were no child protection organizations that stood against it, and because no member of Congress (with the brave exceptions of Ron Wyden and Rand Paul) wanted to face re-election having opposed a bill against sex trafficking, despite its manifest flaws. In the wake of the law's passage, its real targets -- not child sex traffickers, but adult sex workers and the internet platforms used by them -- have borne the brunt of its effects. Websites like the Erotic Review and Craigslist's personals section have either shut down entirely or for U.S. users, while Backpage.com has been seized, leaving many adult sex workers in physical and financial peril.
A new child protection organization, Prostasia Foundation, has just been announced, with the aim of taking a more sex-positive approach that would allow it to push back against laws that really target porn or sex work under the guise of being child protection laws. Instead, the organization promotes a research-based approach to the prevention of child sexual abuse before it happens. From the organization's press release: "Prostasia Director Jaylen MacLaren is a former child prostitute who used a website like this to screen her clients. She now recognizes those clients as abusers, but she does not blame the website for her suffering. 'I am committed to preventing child sexual abuse, but I don't believe that this should come at the cost of civil liberties and sexual freedom,' Jaylen said. 'I have found ways to express my sexuality in consensual and cathartic ways.'" Nerea Vega Lucio, a member of the group's Advisory Council, said, 'Child protection laws need to be informed by accurate and impartial research, and ensuring that policy makers have access to such research will be a top priority for Prostasia.'"
A new child protection organization, Prostasia Foundation, has just been announced, with the aim of taking a more sex-positive approach that would allow it to push back against laws that really target porn or sex work under the guise of being child protection laws. Instead, the organization promotes a research-based approach to the prevention of child sexual abuse before it happens. From the organization's press release: "Prostasia Director Jaylen MacLaren is a former child prostitute who used a website like this to screen her clients. She now recognizes those clients as abusers, but she does not blame the website for her suffering. 'I am committed to preventing child sexual abuse, but I don't believe that this should come at the cost of civil liberties and sexual freedom,' Jaylen said. 'I have found ways to express my sexuality in consensual and cathartic ways.'" Nerea Vega Lucio, a member of the group's Advisory Council, said, 'Child protection laws need to be informed by accurate and impartial research, and ensuring that policy makers have access to such research will be a top priority for Prostasia.'"
The religious right and SJWs have a lot more in common than anyone wants to admit. At least on this one I even think "its a sin" is better than "because you're being exploited no matter what you say".. Empowering women right up until they make a 'bad' choice, then its 'we're stopping this for your own good' just like the right.
> I don't think it's fair to conflate anti-prostitution with anti-sex.
The same people that are against prostitution are generally against many of the choices you would make about your own body. This goes for both political factions.
This strange confluence of fundies and feminists has been in force since the 80s when Gloria Steinem first picketed against porn.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Remember the furor over dancers at a microsoft-GDC party?
Did you understand the objections? It was a professional conference for game developers. Objecting to the dancers at that event is in no way incompatible with sex-positive feminism or support of legal, safe and regulated prostitution.
I've noticed one common aspect of arguments against SJWs is that they over-simplify and straw man the things they find objectionable. It's hard to tell if it is deliberate or if just some kind of premature "hot take". They often employ emotive language and imagery like "screeching" and hint at conspiracies.
If SJWs didn't exist then anti-SJWs would have to invent them... So they did.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Which feminists would that be? Susie Bright, Nina Hartley, Rachel Kramer Bussel? BTW they're all sex positive feminists.
I'd also point out the Ron Paul often got into a lather about what people did with their unmentionables. Rand Paul like his father doesn't think women should be allowed to control their bodies. So you might want to take that log out of your eye now.
About those grid girls, people objected as they're thought to encourage morons to view women as objects and not you know people with their own tastes, values and desires. How about you run this little experiment for me. Go and get a job at a gay bar, wear stupidly tight shirts and hot pants. Clothes so tight that they look ready to snap. Work there for a month and tell me how it felt. Tell me how it felt when a drunk patron makes a pass at you, how it felt when they waived a tip in front of you as they asked you out on a date. Tell me how many times you got groped on an average shift, and then tell me how bad objectifying is. Besides what has F1 lost by getting rid of them? Are you there to watch the cars or the women. If the latter then why don't you save yourself a sunburn and go to a strip club.