Human Trafficking and Prostitution

Today in class we listened to the presentation about human trafficking. It amazed me how much this issue was gendered; most of the victims of human trafficking were women and girls. This didn't really surprise me, in many ways. It just is another symptom of patriarchy and oppression. Still, what fascinated me most was the conversation we had during the discussion.

We were all sitting there debating whether or not it would help if prostitution were legalized, and that's only one tiny, miniscule piece of the puzzle. Of course, legalization would not be addressing the underlying problems behind prostitution, regardless of region; it would, however, make it safer and regulated for many of the individuals within it.

I truly believe that there would still, no matter what the circumstances, be a "black market" version of human trafficking; if we legalize prostitution for adults, there will be someone who will traffic children. I am not saying that it is right, moral, good, desirable; I'm just saying that it is there and always will be. Look at porn: it is legal, to make and to purchase, as long as everyone involved is at least 18. Yet there are people who make child porn, and while illegal, it happens.

Still, legalization would mean better conditions (i.e., safer housing, food, less fear of police, rape, etc., in terms of structural consequences; better access to medical care, especially as it relates to sexual health, birth control, pregnancy care, STI's, etc.) and better regulations. We would know who was involved, how, we would control wages, apply taxes (can you imagine the revenue that could be collected in taxes on prostitution?!) and we could work through a lot of theory on why we view sex and prostitution the way we do in society (i.e., punishing the prostitute but not the "john," minimal punishments for pimps, etc.)

And I believe that stigma would change -- not disappear, but change. There would be a place in society for this group of individuals now, whether or not it is a desirable place.

On the other hand, not legalizing, I found the idea of shifting the stigma to johns fascinating -- making a public site much like the sex offenders list to publish those involved in prostitution. After all, what is a business without supply and demand? And the point was raised that many politicians, government officials, trusted businessmen, etc., would be discovered to be on this list. My reaction: let them be! If they've put themselves in such a place, they deserve to be there. Either society will tolerate it with a "boys will be boys" attitude, or people will really start to evaluate their choices when it comes to paying for these services.

Did anyone else find it interesting that there was no research found for the LGBT crowd? I know that a disproportionate number of trans women are, at some point or another, prostitutes. Also, we didn't hear about women hiring prostitutes. Just interesting to me.

Oh, and finally -- language is icky around this. Did anyone notice that we continually used the term "to buy a prostitute"? Because, if you're a pimp, sure, I'll agree to that. Otherwise, you don't buy a prostitute, you hire one. Let's not make stigmatized, marginalized women any more stigmatized, marginalized, and outcast than they need to be.

Guess who's back!

Oh. My goodness. I did get a bit behind in my blogging for a while there, didn't I? Life was kind of upside-down there for a while with everything going on.... for those who don't know, there is probably going to be an article in the Juniatian soon with quotes from my girlfriend and I, along with several others. I could go on for hours about what was happening, since I was so inherently involved, and since we were facing so much discrimination and harassment and difficulties. It is regarding gender and conflict, so I could blog about it all quite legitimately, but I don't know if I want to anymore. It has been up to ninety percent of my life for so incredibly long that I don't know if I want to bring it into any more areas of my life. I want to have parts of my life, of my conscious thought, of my being that have nothing at all to do with the harassment and the social movement and the no longer being welcome in the dormitories. We're moved in and settled in our new home, an apartment down in town, and we're happier here. It's such a different experience, you know? But enough of all this, for now, at least. I'll post more about this later, I think.

What's been interesting to me recently is seeing depictions -- not those in my own personal life, but those in pop culture, in the media -- of people who don't fit into gender boxes. I admit that it's been standing out to me because it's something that's been on my mind an awful lot, but it's been more and more apparent.

Okay. So there are pieces of media that are designed to showcase individuals who don't fit into gender boxes: Rocky Horror Picture Show (Sweet Transvestite?) comes to mind, along with Hedwig and the Angry Inch (the main character is a trans woman, albeit a nasty, selfish, conniving, bitchy, if funny, trans woman), and Rent, with all of the various LGBT characters (especially Angel -- by far the most pleasant trans character in a movie / show I know of so far). But there's still a lot of confusion and variation in depictions; it's still a long way from where it needs to be. My mother loves watching what my father calls "cop shows" -- TV programs about medical or legal events and issues. One of my mother's favorites is The Closer, and one night when I was home on a break, I watched an episode with her that happened to be the episode where a former detective from the station returns -- not as George, but as Georgette. Her former partner is dumbfounded, rude, nasty, and hateful. And she struggles through the episode to explain herself:

"I look different. I'm not a man anymore, which means I don't pee standing up. I wear a dress instead of a suit; I walk differently. I changed how I do a lot of things, but not what's in my heart!"

Much of the drama and confusion in the episode seemed to center around Georgette's sex change and her sexual orientation. Her old partner questions her when she tells them that she is attracted to other women:

"You underwent a sex change to become a lesbian?!"

She makes it clear that gender and sexuality are not the same:

"It had nothing to do with my sexual preference. It was more about how I identified with the world, personally. And you weren't bothered that I was a lesbian when I was a guy."

I smiled when I saw that. I had the same conversation when I came out to my father, who spent three hours trying to work though the connections between sex, gender, sexual orientation, and the fact that I'm a lesbian who is dating someone who sometimes isn't viewed as a girl. Why don't we have more characters on television who are like real people? It's getting better, but it's still treated as such a novelty. I know it's not the whole episode, or anything near it, but there's a preview for the episode on youtube.

Much longer rant than necessary. Until next time, I suppose....

Feminine Follies

I was having a discussion with a friend of mine earlier today about how she searches for femininity through male attention. I was a little surprised by this on some level, I think; this friend is a beautiful, strong, powerful, independent woman, and I value her for those traits. It surprised me that she searched for that attention and validation through men.

So it got me thinking about how I define my own femininity, and about how I validate it. My methods are inherently different; as a lesbian, I don't seek male attention. But I am, in some ways, feminine; where do I find this and affirm it?

My friend's comes from interactions; can mine? Do most women find interactions and relationships to be the source of their sense of femininity? I feel that my girlfriend to be far more feminine than I am. Flirting with other girls can sometimes leave me feeling more feminine, sometimes less; not definitely feminine or not. Relationships don't seem to hold the key.

I am not someone who enjoys getting dressed up in make-up and heels and dresses with sparkly shiny things; I find those clothes to be more oppressive than beautiful. I don't wear makeup, and I don't tend to shave my body hair. I don't do anything special with styling my hair, and I don't care terribly if it gets tangled or has clay in it after I've been in the Studio all afternoon. So, again, my physical appearance is not a source of my femininity.

The times when I feel most feminine, I think, is when I am in nurturing roles. I am in school studying to be a teacher. I am a tutor in the community, I work with children. My girlfriend and I are the "moms" of Juniata's LGBT community. We invite friends to our room, give them tea, take care of them when they're sick, stressed, stretched too thin, needing a sounding-board. We "adopt" freshmen (and sometimes upperclassmen!) who sort of "arrive" to us, and we take them under our wings. We care for people, help them, when we can. This is simply because of the way I was raised -- my mother was an active participant in community service all through my childhood, as was the rest of my family -- but caring for people seems to be the only time I feel particularly, stereotypically "feminine". And I'm okay with that.

I do think that we have a bigger question here, however; for me, it's fine; I can take care of a little kid with the sniffles and feel girly. But what about the girls who feel girly when they're getting hit on at a party? What about the girls who aren't considered as attractive because they don't fit into the box, and so they don't get asked to dance? What about the girls who can't feel girly without a man there to give them that femininity? Is there a way we can break out of our boxes?

Chapstick Woes

Today in class we discussed the implications for not fitting in the "box" for gender ideals, and about the institutional factors putting us and keeping us in those boxes. When we were discussing gendered advertising and the various chapstick / lipgloss / lipstick options for women, I posed a question; what happens to the individuals who do not buy what has been marketed to them? If women, as we posed in class, are "obliged" by the industry and by societal demands, to buy at least seven or eight different tubes of lipstick, and the newest, prettiest colors and styles of clothing.... what does actually happen to the women who use free promotional chapstick from Social Security like the tube I used in class today? What happens to the women who only own the one tube of lipstick? What happens when we do not buy the new pretty clothes? What happens to me?

A few days ago in class, we discussed one potential outcome for people who do not fit into the "box"; their sexuality is brought into question. This can be a serious concern for some individuals, leading to social and/or physical harm. But there are many more implications to this as well. I explored another aspect of these implications; now that my little sister and I are both away at college, we don't see each other often. Much of the time we do get to see each other, I'm catching up on readings and sleep, and she's socializing. Over the summer, we both work full-time. So when we get the chance to socialize, it's for a few hours in an afternoon, and what do we do? We go shopping. We do this, I am convinced, because we have been socialized to do this. We do this because my sister likes to look at clothes (at our parents' house, she has a closet which would take up most of my dorm room, it seems) and she likes to buy clothes for herself. We go out shopping, and we look at things. I hardly ever buy something new, and she sometimes does. But this is how we bond, how we spend time together. She finds it easier to take the time to shop than to take the time for a hike down the canal or a trip to the movies or a meal together somewhere in town. And that's fine, on some level; but it still remains that I have to go shopping. If I do not spend that time shopping, it is not my sexuality that is called into question, but my relationship and friendship with my sister.

This is not the only relationship that can be injured by these rules. Friendships, partnerships, marriages, parent-child relationships.... all of these have gendered roles that we are required to play. So my question remains: what happens to those of us who don't fit in the box? Who does fit? Why do we still let this effect who and what we are?