Edit: I'd like to make something clear before I begin - This is not a personal attack on Sheila Jeffreys. I'm sure she is a source of inspiration for many people, and a comfort to as many more. But telling people they are unable to disagree with or question the position taken by her or her supporters is oppressive and against everything we should be working for as intelligent, free-thinking human beings.


So there has been a collective uproar recently, over an image Hexy posted at Hexpletive, showing a slogan printed on a bag that was available for purchase at a sex worker convention here in Australia.



There seems to be some rather interesting interpretations of this image floating around at the moment so I'd like to get my language nerd on for a moment, and break it down a little *insert record scratching sound*:


Shelia is not my sister
The image uses the possessive 'my', indicating that the person with the bag or shirt believes that Sheila and her views are not representative of them as an individual. Not a personal attack. Not an all-encompassing statement.

Anti-sex feminists do not speak on behalf of sex workers

They don't. Someone outside of a certain sphere cannot speak on behalf those inside of the sphere. It's patronising and presumptive and paternalistic. I don't speak on behalf of sex workers, as I am not one. I do not speak on behalf of women of colour, because I am not one.

Let's try another example that makes this a lot clearer: Men do not speak on behalf of women, they advocate and support women's voices.

In this specific circumstance, someone opposed to a particular industry cannot speak 'on behalf' of those in the industry without a huge degree of the bias the radfems keep accusing Hexy of, completely negating any agency of those within it. Bias is OK as long as we can acknowlege it; We all have our own beliefs and tenets and they will invariably colour our views. It becomes problematic whenever someone presumes to speak for an entire group of people, of which they are not a part.

The anti-sex bit? Maybe I havent read enough Jeffreys, maybe I've only read the bits that are rather damning. But anyone who will actively both suggest and support the idea that all hetro sex (as well as the sex industry as a whole, completely robbing autonomous, intelligent, empowered women the ability to do what they like with their cunts, hands or electric cattle prods) is an oppressive tool of the patriarchy is, to my mind, against sex, therefore: anti-sex. There seems to be a lot of hand-wringing and pearl-clutching surrounding the term, which, if you take 5 seconds and actually think about it, is used fairly accurately in this case.

If you'll forgive me a rather flippant analogy - Im anti-foot rubs. I find them repulsive and gross and degrading and wrong. However I know people who cant get enough of them, both giving and receiving, and will occasionally pay money to get them. I'm not about to demand all people forsake foot rubs and stick to hand massages, just because I loathe them.

Sex comes in many and varied flavours; to condemn one aspect of it is utterly dismissive of those who willingly and consensually participate in that particular aspect of it. My desire to fuck my boyfriend is not a social construct. Quite frankly, if people are that concerned over who or what I put inside my vagina, then I think they need to get a less voyeuristic hobby.

There was also mention in the comments page about privilege, and how awful sex workers in Australia were being for 'poking fun' at those with less privilege. Leaving aside the groundless accusation, I thought I'd throw in a little something about privilege:

Privilege doesnt erase your voice. It means you have to acknowlege said privilege, do everything you can to dismantle it, and use your powers for good, so to speak. To some degree, privilege affords us the ability to take a step back, critically analyze a situation, and create informed opinions. And the privilege flag is a bit of a nasty one to fly - the vast majority of us have privilege in one instance or another; a perfect example is our ability to use the hyper-mega-goat-track. Does access to a global network make us privileged? You betcha. Does it make our voices less important? Not at all. Does it make our voice MORE important than the next person? Not on your life.


If the image (and Hexy's subsequent posts) had said 'Sheila is not my sister and we get together at our sex worker meetings and burn effigies of her and pass the hat around to send to 3rd world drug cartels so they can sell more women into sex slavery' then yeah, I could see why people would be getting furious, and I would too. But it didnt. It was personal opinion, something which certain parts of the femosphere seem determined to keep for themselves whilst disallowing that of others who do not agree with their position.