The Hypocritical Victimisation of Asian Sex Workers in Victoria

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

ABC Radio: Fair Work blitz on sex industry clerical work

Listen here: http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2012/s3566832.htm 

MARK COLVIN: The Fair Work Ombudsman is conducting a blitz on Victorian brothels. The campaign will focus on clerical employees in the industry, rather than sex workers.

The Victorian Sex Industry Network has cautiously welcomed the announcement. But it's warned the Ombudsman's office not to get caught up in a moral witch hunt.

Rachel Carbonell reports.

RACHEL CARBONELL: The Fair Work Ombudsman plans to audit about 100 brothels in Victoria, mostly in Melbourne but some in regional Victoria too.

Craig Bildstein is a director with the Ombudsman's office.

CRAIG BILDSTEIN: Each year we run between 5,000 and 7,000 targeted audits so it may be the hospitality sector, could be the cleaning industry, it could be the retail sector. Or in this latest case in Victoria it's the sex industry. But in particular our focus is on the clerical workers, the licensed brothel managers and the receptionists.

RACHEL CARBONELL: Craig Bildstein says it's possible clerical workers in the sex industry may be more reluctant than others to speak out about poor working conditions.

CRAIG BILDSTEIN: It's put to us that a large number of clerical workers in this industry would be female. They'd probably be young women. They're most likely from a non-English-speaking background. They probably have a limited professional and personal network which may be restricted to the industry.

I guess in other words they might be reluctant to rock the boat for fear of jeopardising their employment. So it's important for us to come in and ensure that the employers in these premises do understand their lawful obligations and to remind the staff that there is an employment regulator that can assist them if they are concerned.

RACHEL CARBONELL: The Fair Work Ombudsman is also concerned about sham contracting.

CRAIG BILDSTEIN: The suggestions that have been made to us at the moment is that some brothel owners are requiring their business managers for example to have an ABN and take on the position as contractors.

So obviously we're concerned to ensure that sham contracting is not in play in these premises so we'll be apprising the operators of the modern award, the Clerks-Private Sector Award 2010 and obviously the National Employment Standards.

RACHEL CARBONELL: But some in the sex industry are concerned that the clerical award isn't necessarily the best fit for those in the clerical part of the sex industry.

Christian Vega is a spokesperson for VIXEN, the Victorian Sex Industry Network.

CHRISTIAN VEGA: What I would caution is that there is this assumption that, yes the managers and receptionists do perform a clerical function but that is a small subsection of the skill set and knowledge base that is required to perform their role effectively.

We're talking about people who are in effective control of a workplace, quite often in late hours of the night, dealing with a clientele that can be unpredictable, that can be intoxicated. You know, these are not just normal admin office workers.

RACHEL CARBONELL: Christian Vega says some clerical workers in the sex industry are reluctant to speak out about poor pay and working conditions is because of the stigma attached to the industry and the moral judgements that are often made about it.

CHRISTIAN VEGA: The part that I guess I have concerns about is that whenever somebody does any sort of accountability or investigation into the sex industry, there is this automatic assumption that because things aren't running as they should do, there is either a criminal or an exploitative element that's present there. It has the potential of turning into a bit of a witch hunt.

RACHEL CARBONELL: But he says overall he's hopeful the Ombudsman's investigation will be positive.

CHRISTIAN VEGA: This investigation is a step towards decriminalisation and what that means is treating our industry just like any other industry. I think there should be, there needs to be a frank, open, objective discussion about working conditions in our industry.

And I would urge the Fair Work Ombudsman to actually look at the impact of stigma, you know, stigma that our industry faces on actual working conditions and the impact that it's had on things like reporting, you know, substandard work practices or pay conditions that aren't up to scratch.

MARK COLVIN: Christian Vega from the Victorian Sex Industry Network ending that report from Rachel Carbonell.

Supporting the Human Rights of Sex Workers: Sex Party Policy- And Damn Proud of It!

By Christian Vega, Sex Worker, Secretary of Victorian branch of the Australian Sex Party

http://www.sexparty.org.au/ASP-News-Updates/supporting-the-human-rights-of-sex-workers-sex-party-policy-and-damn-proud-of-it.html 

Aristotle wrote, “To avoid criticism, say nothing, do nothing, be nothing.” Conversely, when one has much to say one must be prepared for an onslaught. 

Such has been the fate of the Australian Sex Party in the aftermath of the 2012 Melbourne by-election.  Having been denied a win that was thought to be in the bag, the Victorian Greens have been indignant and rather than take time for some critical self reflection, the party and its supporters has sought to blame everyone else for their loss, targeting the younger and much smaller Sex Party in particular. 

 Megan Tyler, anti-sex industry colleague of senior Greens member, Kathleen Maltzahn, has joined the tirade (Political party or lobby group? The dark side of the Australian Sex Party, 31/07/2012). 

From the headline it’s clear her position, she doesn’t much like the Australian Sex Party. It’s a strange question to ask: Political Party or Lobby Group? Could this question not be asked of any political party? To support the interests of a part of the community- isn’t that what all political parties do? Perhaps she thinks we are somehow different...

One of the Sex Party Campaign pamphlets

Tyler writes, “The carefully selected policies that appear in Sex Party pamphlets, however, fail to mention what is at the centre of the party’s very being; a push for the full decriminalisation of prostitution.”

Well that’s sort of true.  Identified as best practice for human rights throughout the world by international public health bodies as well as Australian sex workers themselves, decriminalisation of the sex industry is a worthy enough goal that the Sex Party would, of course, adopt it as policy. Supported by evidence, upholding human rights, promoting civil liberties, good health outcomes and social justice, I am proud to be a member of a party that would make such a stand.  The centre of the Sex Party’s very being though?  Now that is a stretch.  The decriminalisation of sex work is no doubt an important policy, but to call it the centre? Hmm.   Perhaps if one is obsessed with the sex industry one may fail to notice the range of other policy areas that have shaped the Sex Party’s identity- Anti-Censorship, Equality and Anti-discrimination, Drug Law Reform- hall marks of our civil liberty platform that were around much earlier than our sex work policy.

Sex Workers worldwide advocate for decriminalisation

Tyler portrays decriminalisation of sex work as “basically end the criminalisation of all forms of prostitution and make them free from any special government intervention,” and “legalisation means regulation and the sex industry would rather have free rein to boost its profits.”

This is a fallacy anti-sex work lobbyists often use: to equate decriminalisation with deregulation when the two are entirely different.  To clarify- decriminalisation is the removal of criminal codes related to sex work.  This does not mean that all activities under the label of sex work are allowed to happen; advocates for decriminalisation are not asking for the sex industry to operate “free rein.”  Decriminalisation is not an attempt to legitimise crime; child sexual exploitation and rape would remain illegal under the current criminal code.  It is an approach that seeks to clarify the distinction between acts that are clearly unacceptable and those that are legitimate. It is a system that has been introduced into New Zealand and more recently in Canada; the outcomes of adopting such an approach are clearly outlined in research: greater enablement of sex workers to exercise choices that make them less vulnerable, greater empowerment of sex workers to seek justice in instances of violence and other crimes , the number of sex workers remained stable and in the case of some street sex working sectors- had actually reduced.  Tyler and her ilk (those that have built a career that hinges on the perception that all sex workers are victims) must ignore this legitimacy in order for their position to hold. 

   

UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon
has called for the decriminalisation
 of sex work since 2008 

The fundamentals of decriminalisation are these: Sex Work is Work.  Therefore, Sex work should be regulated in the same way that every other occupation is regulated. When additional laws are in place (the current legislative situation in most states throughout Australia) they prevent the standards and conditions that can be expected in any other workplace (industrial relations, occupational health and safety and equal opportunity) from being applied to the sex industry. In short, we just want to be treated the same as everyone else.  This is the position of sex worker activists, this is the policy of the Australian Sex Party. 

Tyler claims, “Patten helped make the real aims of the party quite clear in the lead-up to the election when she claimed that the ASP didn’t attempt a preference deal with the Greens because of concerns about an “anti-sex feminist element” in the party.”

That is an interpretation built on an inaccuracy.  Firstly, the Sex Party did attempt to contact the Greens to talk preferences, as written in the Herald Sun and acknowledged by at least one Greens volunteer, “maybe [it’s] the Greens fault for not picking up the phone.” While it’s our concern that the anti-sex feminist compulsions may have prevented the Greens from engaging with us- and ultimately contributing to their defeat- it hardly defines the “aims of the party.”

Again, Tyler’s attempt to be coy is rather feeble “The “anti-sex” slur was most likely just a veiled reference to Kathleen Maltzahn, who served as a Greens local councillor in Yarra and stood as a Greens candidate in the 2010 Victorian state election.”

Even Maltzahn’s Wikipedia page doesn’t beat around the bush: “The Australian Sex Party have accused her of being an "anti-sex campaigner” and preferenced Labor ahead of the Greens in the election for the seat of Melbourne on July 21 2012 which caused The Greens narrow loss." The tensions between the Sex Party and Kathleen Maltzahn first began to influence the political relationship between the two parties during the state election in 2010.  During a radio interview on Joy 94.9, Maltzahn declared her preferences- even though they had yet to be finalised.  Perhaps it should have been expected but the supposed feminist had preferenced the only other female candidate last- perhaps it was because of that candidate’s status as a sex worker, perhaps it was because she was the Sex Party’s candidate.  Either way, Maltzahn- and by extension, the Greens- had sent a signal that they were not interested in working with us. 

Tyler continues to sing her colleague’s praises, “Maltzahn is also a prominent anti-trafficking campaigner and founder of Project Respect... Part of its vision is given as “a world where there is no longer demand for prostitution.” Now, why wouldn’t a sex industry lobby group be happy with that?”

Supporters of sex workers protest against Maltzahn, 2011

What Tyler fails to mention is that sex workers themselves reject the position of Project Respect.  To quote the Scarlet Alliance, the Australian Sex Workers Association, “It was reported in a May 2004 Lateline interview that Project Respect, a Victorian NGO, had called for the re-criminalisation of the sex industry as a way of addressing what the Government refers to as the trafficking of women for the purpose of sexual servitude. These and other anti-sex work views have had a harmful impact on sex workers in Australia. However the anti-sex work lobby has been increasingly using the issue of trafficking to hide their broader agenda of making all sex work illegal.” Organisations such as Project Respect and Tyler’s CATWA are part of the ‘Rescue Industry’, a whole sector of NGOs who gain their funding through the portrayal of sex work as victimising and exploitative. Their positions often hijack supportive and harm reduction based responses for moralistic/abolitionist ones.  The Australian Sex Party believes that front line workers in the industry must be listened to in order to implement policy that is both informed and would support their human rights.  It’s clear that Tyler does not agree.

The Sex Party's Robbie Swan

Tyler, “Many of my colleagues are quite shocked to hear about the intimate relationship between the Sex Party and the sex industry” Uh, really? This may be the first accusation the political party has received that our name is too subtle.  But by establishing ambiguity, Tyler has created an opportunity to make yet another inaccurate interpretation: that when one says “sex industry” one must be talking about brothels, right? Actually, no.  As Robbie Swann explains in an this response to Guy Rundle’s attack on the Sex Party, “The Eros Association stopped taking brothel owners as members over a decade ago when it became the adult ‘retail’ association. As a result we now only have one brothel in Victoria as an associate member on a fee of $590 per year. The only other brothel to have supported the Sex Party with a donation of $500 was The Boardroom of Melbourne, a couple of years ago. Mr. Rundle’s [And Dr. Tyler’s] suggestion that the Victorian brothel owners are big supporters of the Eros Association is demonstrably untrue. Rundle [and Tyler] appear ignorant of the fact that the legal Victorian brothels have their own industry association anyway. The annual returns of both the Eros Association (an incorporated not for profit adult industry association) and The Sex Party (a registered political party) are on the public record.”

“That the commercial interests of the sex industry might occasionally clash with the pursuit of civil liberties, or other important things – like say, gender equality – is apparently unthinkable.” Yet another tired strategy used by anti-sex work moralists, positioning civil liberties against gender equality- as if the two are somehow incompatible.  Tyler fails to recognise the efforts made by the Sex Party regarding gender equality, it is party policy to promote greater inclusion of women in government, to strengthen current equal opportunity legislation and fight discrimination where it currently exists. 

Tyler Claims, “The Australian discussion around the sex industry exists largely in a bubble where liberal notions of choice reign supreme.” If only this were true.  Unfortunately, in the state of Victoria, the law is pretty clear (Sex Work Act 1994, Section 17 subsection 3): “A person must not publish or cause to be published a statement which is intended or likely to induce a person to seek employment as a sex worker; or in a brothel or with an escort agency or any other business that provides sex work services” In addition to prohibiting businesses from advertising for workers, this law also prohibits the distribution of information about working in the sex industry.  This means that the information that would help people make an informed choice about working (or even not working) in the sex industry is not currently available. For many of us, sex work is a choice but clearly it is not the dominant ideal, to claim that this notion “reigns supreme” is more than just a little exaggerated. 

Tyler writes: “This creates an unusual climate where it is thought that, to be progressive, you must be sympathetic to an industry that principally relies on the buying and selling of women.” Placing aside the rancid and disparaging characterisation that sex work is the “selling of women” (as opposed to the consensual trade of services provided by workers of all genders sexes and sexualities), what’s so unusually progressive about supporting people whose rights are being trounced every day? This is another attempt to conflate supporters of sex worker rights with proponents of exploitation, if you want to see similar examples of this one only needs to look back to a time when support for gay rights was touted as promoting paedophilia. 

“Elsewhere in the world, however, socialists, social democrats and other social progressives are moving towards understanding prostitution as a form of violence and as a barrier to women’s equality. In terms of legislation, this is epitomised by the Nordic Model, which criminalises the buying of sexual services, but decriminalises selling” Tyler is speaking about legislation that was adopted in Sweden.  By saying “social progressives” I’m wondering if she is referring to writers of not only this policy, but the policy of sterilisation of transgender people seeking gender reassignment surgery, the forced sterilisation of people with a disability and the zero tolerance approach to drug use.  Yeah, real progressive...

Swedish academic, Petra Ostregren
opposes the Swedish Model

“Despite mounting evidence that the Nordic Model is effective in curtailing prostitution and sex trafficking, it continues to be derided and dismissed in Australia.” Rebranding the ‘Swedish Model’ (perhaps she feels the brand has been too damaged), Tyler ignores the mountain of evidence produced by academics around the world as well as within Sweden itself, that demonstrates how ineffective and harmful the legislative framework is.

“Earlier this year, for instance, the Kirby Institute at UNSW released a report on the sex industry in New South Wales, which claimed that the difference between the Nordic Model and full criminalisation (often favoured by conservative political regimes) may be “largely illusory”.” At this point of her piece, Tyler reveals much about the approach one must take in order to stand in a tenuous position as she does.  Clearly, one has to ignore a highly respected academic body has conducted evidence based peer reviewed research in order to commit to a position that oppresses sex workers.  This “pre-scientific” approach is often adopted by sex work prohibitionist and is well documented.  

“It also trotted out the tired claim that criminalising the buying of sexual services automatically positions “sex workers as victims”.” Actually, the most significant portrayers of “sex workers as victims” were the policy writers to first put together Tyler’s beloved ‘Nordic Model’.  This re-emerges the Swedish government’s evaluation of the abolition of sex work: “[Sex workers] describe themselves as having chosen to prostitute themselves and don’t see themselves as being involuntarily exposed to anything.  Even if it’s not forbidden to sell sex, they feel hunted by the police.  They feel as if they’ve been declared incapable of managing their own affairs in that their actions are tolerated, but their will and choices are not respected.  Further, they believe it is possible to distinguish between voluntary and forced prostitution… (These) negative effects of the ban that they describe can almost be regarded as positive when viewed from the perspective that the aim of the law is to combat prostitution.”  So basically the Swedish model says that sex workers’ sense of stigma, being hunted down and lack of respect are good things, a means to an end.  And Tyler wonders why such a framework is derided in Australia. 

“Assertions such as these continue to fuel an odd situation in Australia. If, when talking about prostitution, you raise issues of exploitation or structural inequality – traditionally hallmarks of Marxist analyses – you get accused of being a right-wing moralist.” No Tyler, no one is calling you a moralist because of your views on equality and human rights, we call you a moralist because you are not willing to apply these to sex workers.  The policies she advocates for are demonstrably harmful towards women, she would rather see us without rights, without protection in an ineffective effort to stamp us out, regardless of the cost. 

“But perhaps this constant bias shouldn’t be surprising in a country where the sex industry not only has its own political party but has also managed to con a bunch of academics, among others, into voting for it.”

Let’s look at what is clear- there are two sides of the debate- pro-sex work and anti-sex work.

Fiona Patten, Speaking at a rally for
sex worker rights earlier this year

 Whatever you believe, the Australian Sex Party -with its sex work supportive policies, it’s consultation with sex workers, it inclusion of sex workers with in its membership and its pre-selection of sex workers as candidates- is very clear about where it stands in this debate- we are not trying to con anyone.  I think The Sex Party has done a great job in promoting discussion of the issue and if people listen to sex workers and happen to agree with them- I don’t think that’s a con. Tyler seems to be labouring under the delusion that people couldn’t possibly make up their own minds to agree with us or not; just as she believes that I could not possibly freely choose to do sex work. 

 On the other hand, the Victorian Greens have not been as transparent.  When Kathleen Maltzahn was pressed on radio during the 2010 state election campaign about her party’s stance on sex work she denied her party had any, despite her party’s website clearly stating it will “end the criminalisation of consensual adult sex work.” Perhaps this omission was an innocent oversight or perhaps it indicates an awareness of the tension within the Greens, that such moralistic conservatism is best covered up- after all it did just cost them valuable support that could have secured them a win in the Melbourne by-election.  So what’s it going to be Victorian Greens- Are you pro- or anti- sex workers?

Whore Pride- A Short Film

So this was a digital story I made a couple of years ago.  It's a snapshot of achievements I had made at the time.  Sex Workers, stigmatised and hiding, are often erased and silenced throughout history.  I refuse to be made invisible.  I am here.  We are here, and if I have anything to do with it, we will not be forgotten.  

I've been lucky enough to screen in a few times alongside other digital stories by other sex workers.  I've even taken these stories across the planet to share with other sex workers.  

I'm really grateful to Zero-One-Zero, an amazing, community minded multimedia collective who gave me the skills to put this- and so many future projects- together.  

The Lies That Obstruct The Human Rights Of Sex Workers

According to academic Caroline Norma, I am a “prostituted woman”. 

While her inaccuracy might be obvious, the layers of her misrepresentation of me and my community are numerous as an onion’s and as eye-wateringly bitter. 

Firstly I am not a woman.  I am male and I am a sex worker.  The assumption that all sex workers are female may be seen as clumsy oversight, innocuous and naive. Did you fall for it?

The representation of the entire front line of the sex industry as female is a deliberate distortion of the actual workforce.  The charade may or may not be obvious but the intention is clear; so long as everyone believes that all sex workers are women then gender plays an active role in defining who are the victims and who are the oppressors. 

There is a sad irony in this rhetoric; supposed “feminists” portray women (sex workers) as weak, inevitable victims of exploitative men (‘pimps’ and clients).  Sad because the truth, ignored by these academics, paints a starkly different picture of sex workers than these doomsayers purport.

Some sex workers are the strongest people I know.  Some have overcome incredible hardship.  Some have reconciled traumatic personal histories. Some have demonstrated fantastic resilience and resourcefulness. They have made choices in the face of immense social stigma, discrimination and prejudice.  I’ve been inspired by what we have achieved together despite our differences. 

Sex workers are of all sexes, genders and sexualities. 

While some estimates place female sex workers at 80% of the workforce, 15% male and 5% transgender, particular sectors of the industry have a different representation of gender (for example, statistics from the Business Licensing Authority indicate independent private workers closer to 50% male, 50% female). 

While these numbers may be interesting, they’re greatest power is that they debunk the traditional feminist representation that all sex work is violence against women.  How do I, a male sex worker who sees male clients, pose a threat to all the females everywhere?

The second misrepresentation Norma and her ilk assert is loaded in the language they use. 

Flatly ignoring the voices of sex workers to be referred to as “sex workers” and continuing to refer to us as “prostituted women” show their true colours. 

By interpreting what we do as “prostitution” her description of my job as “commercially mediated sexual abuse” might pass.  Using these terms, loaded with all of their values and judgements allow for all sorts of prejudice to be expressed at the mere mention of our occupation. 

If one is interested in being objective, upholding values of social justice, equity and fairness then one ought to follow the protocol we have used for all people throughout history- use terms minority groups have determined as appropriate. 

We are not asking for special treatment; history contains many examples of groups demanding the right to be named by themselves- it is why we use the term “African-American” and not “Negro”, it is why we say “Intersex” instead of “hermaphrodite”.  In our case, please call us ‘sex workers’ and not “prostitutes” or “prostituted women”.   

In fact there are already precedents that have come into practice.  UNAIDS, the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS, considers the words “prostitution” and “prostitute” inappropriate and directs people to use the term “sex work” in their terminology guide. 

Following this, in 2010 the Victorian Government renamed the law that regulates the sex industry from “The Prostitution Control Act” to “The Sex Work Act” and changed all references accordingly. 

The term “sex work” was coined by American sex worker activist, Carol Leigh, in the 1970s.  The term emphasises what we are doing: work.  The rights we are fighting for are labour rights. 

Framed as work, the problems associated with sex work can be addressed via the recourse available to all other forms of employment: with good standards in occupational health and safety, industrial relations, human rights, equal opportunity and non-discrimination. 

The resistance that some feminists exhibit in using our preferred terminology not only demonstrates a lack of respect towards us but also an unwillingness to address any of the genuine difficulties we face. 

By not framing sex work as work the problems can feel insurmountable. From this perspective, exploitation appears uncontrollable.  The only solution seems to be that we just have to do our hardest to stamp it out at all costs. 

While everyone is emotionally caught up in the tragedy of what is presented no one focuses on real solutions beyond the false promise of prohibition.  Academics can build a career churning out books and articles, profiting from the perpetual myth-making that I am a helpless victim. 

I am not saying my occupation is without its flaws.  The hardships that are present in our work can be overcome, not by abolishing sex work and exiling us to the underground, but by embracing us and allowing the standards that legitimise all other occupations apply to us. 

Put plainly: sex work is work. Anything else is selling us short.   

Anti-Sex Work Academic's Feeble Attempt at Stigmatising Us

On Jun 19, Caroline wrote an opinion piece in the Age, Standing up for sex workers is standing up for pimps.  You can read her vitriolic bigotry here:  http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/standing-up-for-sex-workers-is-standing-up-for-pimps-20120618-20k84.html#ixzz1yNviycSl 

The shortsighted moralist tone of Norma's words isn't lost on the readers, many of whom (both sex workers and non-sex worker) voiced their disapproval in the comments. 

Amongst the 158 posts is mine. You can read it here:

I am a sex worker. This article is moralistic, abolitionist rubbish that further contributes to the debilitating stigma that already negatively impacts on the mental and physical health of sex workers.

From the headline, Norma is arguing that we should not stand up for sex worker rights, as if we have none. She is advocating for our poverty, our prosecution, our social exclusion. She wants everyone to think the worst of us, victims incapable of making a choice. With that prejudice in the minds of the community, it is no wonder we are treated as second class citizens, no wonder people don't recognise our human rights, no wonder we get no protection from the police or the law, no wonder perpertrators of violence against us feel that they can get away with it.

I am sick of constantly being portrayed as a victim. I've never been pimped out. I used to work for an escort agency but I chose to leave and support myself by working independantly. I chose to. The clients I have chosen to see are diverse- some have disabilities, some have lost their long term partners, some are super busy,some are extraordinarily lonely. The reasons they see sex workers are as varied as their lives. None of them want to exploit, assault or victimise me.

I know I'm not alone in my experience because I've also chosen to stay connected to my colleagues - sex workers of all sexes and genders- for emotional, occupational and community support.

We are not going anywhere. We are part of one of the most enduring professions in human history. Elite Academics like Norma can bad mouth us all she likes. But the truth is we are workers and we have human rights- how about you start recognising them?

Commenter: Christian Vega

Location: Melbourne

Date and time: Jun 19, 2012, 11:32AM

Sex Workers Speak Out For Law Reform, SameSame

After my appearance on the Project, this piece was written in SameSame:



http://www.samesame.com.au/news/local/8526/Sex-workers-speak-out-for-law-reform.htm

A gay male sex worker has spoken up about his role in the sex industry as the campaign continues for various Australian states to loosen up their prostitution laws.

“The world would be a really sad place without sex workers,” says 29-year-old Christian Vega. “For a lot of people, sex workers are their only form of sexual expression. There’s nothing wrong with those people.”

He adds that sex work helps him supplement the small income he makes doing a job in the community sector that he’s passionate about.

In NSW alone, there are an estimated 10,000 sex workers, with a fair percentage of them working in the queer community. In most parts of Australia, private sex work is legal, but some states ban brothel work and most of them ban street work.

Experts in the sex industry say decriminalising various forms of sex work leads to safer working conditions as workers feel able to contact the police with their concerns. Anti-discrimination laws would also benefit the often stigmatised profession.

“We as a community have a choice,” says Vega. “Do we make these people’s lives harder than they already are, or do we support them as part of our community?”

On Channel 10's the Project

So I've made it onto prime time television.  


After the Festival of Sex Work was written about in the Age, Festival Organisers were bombarded with a whole bunch of media requests, Channel 10 was on of them.  

On 3CR's 'Done By Law'

Podcast of an interview with me on 3CR's 'Done By Law' program on Monday night about the festival, sex work and the law.

SEX WORKERS SPEAK OUT

Written by Annie on June 5, 2012

Last week venues around Melbourne hosted talks, public forums and screenings for the city’s firstFestival of Sex Work. Sex worker and advocate Christian Vega from VIXEN (Victorian Sex Industry Network) joins Done By Law to talk about how current laws and policies affect the rights of sex workers in Victoria.

http://www.donebylaw.org/2012/06/05/sex-workers-speak-out/

Festival of Sex Work in the Age

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/sex-workers-shine-light-on-their-trade-with-qa-20120529-1zhqk.html#ixzz1xFfKMqLP

Sex workers shine light on their trade with Q&A

A PORN star, an escort, a tantric practitioner, a dominatrix and a rent boy walk into a bar … and willingly answer any question thrown at them.

At least that's what happened last night at a public forum in the Secret Society Bar in Bourke Street.

In a bid to demystify their profession, the sex workers appeared on a panel open to the public, as part of this week's Festival of Sex Work, the first festival of its kind in Australia.

Organised by Vixen, a collective of current and former sex workers who promote civil rights in the industry, the impetus for the festival was to give a voice to sex workers. The festival receives no corporate sponsorship or government funding.

Last night's event, Ask A Sex Worker A Question, invited members of the public to ask any question in exchange for a gold coin donation.

''We're tired of other people talking about us,'' said event co-organiser Tabitha. ''We're a very diverse group of workers.''

The stars of last night's panel were Australian adult actor Angela White, our most popular internet porn star, and dominatrix Lady Ambrosia Noir, who, along with the rest of the panel answered questions about their ideal day at work, labour rights in the industry and depictions of sex workers.

The Age asked the panel about the portrayal of sex workers in the Craig Thomson scandal.

Private escort Cassie said she found the emphasis on Thomson's alleged use of sex workers, rather than of misusing his credit card, offensive.

''Particularly the way most media threw around the term 'hooker'. Sex work is a legal service,'' she said. Male escort Christian, who has worked in the industry for 15 years, said: ''We want people to hear from us, instead of thinking they can speak on our behalf.''

Other events at this week's festival included a historical sex work walking tour of the city, a forum today at Melbourne University on sex work policy and law, a film screening at ACMI and workshops for sex workers.

The festival culminates with International Whores' Day on Saturday, a celebration of sex workers' rights, celebrated locally with a Red Umbrella Rally on the steps of Parliament House.

''There's a lot of stigma around that word,'' said Tabitha.

''We're trying to reclaim it back for ourselves.''

Interviewed on the Naughty Rude Show, SYN FM

On the second day of the Festival, Nada, Leni and I were interviewed on the Naughty Rude show for SYN.  It was a totally fun interview, responding to listeners' querstions and getting a few points across ourselves.  Podcast is at the link.

http://syn.org.au/program/naughty-rude-show/episode/audio/2012/06/06/festival-sex-work/8041

The Naughty Rude Show

Festival of Sex Work

Submitted by patricianiklas on Wed, 06/06/2012 - 10:29

We chat to Christian, Nada and Leni from the inaugural Festival of Sex Work. We discuss the events of the festival, why it's important for sex workers to tell their own stories, and why sex  workers are called sex workers in the first place.