Dutch TV station apologises for interview with a "cured" gay man

This is more or less a translation of an article in the Dutch newspaper Volkskrant. I've included my own contribution where I thought was necessary and my own thoughts on the case afterwards. 

Thony. Photo from his Intagme profile

A week ago the Dutch TV channel EO (Evangelische Omroep - Evangelical Broadcast) published on its youth website BEAM an interview (in Dutch) with the 19-year-old Thony Kraamer, who says that God helped him put an end to his gay lifestyle. The interview caused a lot of reactions and a storm of criticism from individuals and organisations. 

In the interview Thony tells about his life in the gay scene: "Every weekend I was in the sleaziest bars and clubs. I would go up on the dance floor, dress up as a girl, use hard drugs, have one boyfriend after another and still cheat on them... I did literally everything that God has forbidden."

Then he says he decided never again to have gay relations: "Whether I'll live my life as a single man or maybe find a wife, I'm looking positively towards the future. I'm giving my life to God."

Apologies
EO received a storm of criticism after publishing the interview. Kraamer's statements were considered as reinforcing a stereotypical and negative image of homosexuality. 

Today (17 February) EO apologised for the interview. In its statement, the channel said that the aim of BEAM was to tell different stories and opinions and to think, together with its audience, what these stories mean to them: "But it didn't work. Thony's intense story brought to many homosexual readers associations with rejection, estrangement and grief. This should never be the consequence of a personal story, regardless of our good intentions... if we have hurt you, we are very sorry."

--- 
So this was the article and I have to say, hats off to the EO for the apology. I followed part of the Twitter storm that fell on them a few days ago and they were very careful to reply to most Tweets respectfully and say things like "this is just one personal story, we also have other stories, and we think they should be heard". And this is admirable for a Christian TV station and indeed the different stories of young people should be heard. If anything, I'm more angry at Thony and I want to share some thoughts about the whole debacle. 

If you read the interview from the link above (e.g. with Google translate), it actually starts off quite nicely - Thony felt different all his life, played with dolls, dressed up in girls' clothes, didn't like his first kiss with a girl... Then (I don't know when - I guess 16-18 years old?) he came out as gay on Facebook and received very positive reactions from his friends and classmates. Something that many people don't have! Then apparently his "crazy gay life" began - going to bars and clubs, doing drugs, having sex with random guys, boyfriend after boyfriend, webcamming for money... Until he felt he had hit rock bottom.

So first of all, Thony seems to be rather transgender/gender-dysphoric than a gay boy. By his own admission, he dressed up in women's clothes, wanted to be a woman and even asked his house doctor for a referral to the "gender team". Perhaps the clubs, drugs and promiscuity were just an acting out of his anxiety over his gender dysphoria? Perhaps if he had had more support and understanding, both from himself and his family, he would've transitioned and lived a happy life as a woman? Instead of denying everything he is and "giving his life to God". As if gay/transgender is incompatible with God... 

But let's say he is a gay boy, since he considers his previous life to have been gay. In my opinion 18-19-year-olds are expected, or at least excused, to live a crazy life of promiscuity, drugs and clubs (always in moderation, boys!!). The realisation that this is not the life you want should come later. But at whatever age, this realisation should lead you to focus more on yourself, your personal development, education, career and improved relationships with people, in other words, find "the golden mean". Not go from one extreme - parties, drugs and sex, to the other - celibacy and denial of your sexual desires. Most of life, most of happiness, is somewhere in between the extremes. 

But figuring out where the "golden mean" is and how you can be happy there takes wisdom and maturity, which a 19-year-old typically doesn't have. And I have the feeling that Thony's "rebirth" as a God-fearing, law-abiding, hetero-wannabe was strongly encouraged, if not forced, by outside - family or church community. And to be honest, I also have the feeling it won't last forever... 

Naturam expellas furca, tamen usque recurret.
You may drive out Nature with a pitchfork, yet she still will hurry back.
(Horace) 

Human trafficking in Bulgaria - interview with Nadia Kozhouharova

This interview was given by Nadia Kozhouharova from Animus Association/La Strada Bulgaria for the newspaper Lichna Drama. I'm translating it with Nadia's permission from Animus' website.

La Strada International is a European network of independent non-government organisations working to prevent human trafficking and support its victims. The members are based in Belarus, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Macedonia, Moldova, The Netherlands, Poland and Ukraine. La Strada's focus is on women from Central and Eastern Europe and its main goal is to advocate for the protection of their human rights, including the right to migrate, work abroad and be protected from violence and abuse. Nadia is the national coordinator of La Strada in Bulgaria. 

- Mrs. Kozhouharova, why is human trafficking so widespread? 

- In this time of globalisation more and more people become victims of human trafficking. The profits from this crime worldwide, according to UNODC, amount to 7-8 billion US dollars annually, which is only comparable to the profits from the illegal sale of drugs and arms. Bulgaria is considered one of the main countries of origin for people trafficked to Germany, Belgium, France and other European countries. The main root causes of human trafficking are poverty, unemployment, gender inequality, violence and discrimination. People migrate in search of a better life abroad and as a way to make a living and become vulnerable to exploitation. 

- How long have you been working on the La Strada programme in Bulgaria? 

- Bulgaria joined La Strada in 1998. In 2004 we were among the founders of the International La Strada Association, which is recognised by national and international institutions as the leading European NGO network in the are of preventing of human trafficking and supporting the victims. To Animus, La Strada is much more than a programme - it's a way of thinking, belonging and motivation for development. It's the framework in which we place all our activities against human trafficking. It makes us feel a part of the broader community of the European civil society, which develops contemporary policies and practices for combating human trafficking. Personally, I have been working at Animus Association since 1995. 

- Haven't Bulgarians become more informed, haven't they learned to protect themselves better from becoming victims of trafficking? 

- There are certain differences, but unfortunately mostly in the fact that nowadays more people become victims of labour exploitation abroad, while in the area of sexual exploitation there isn't much change. In the past, human trafficking was referred to as "white slave trade" or "trade in human flesh" and the attitudes towards the victims were very negative. Now the methods of recruitment of victims have changed. For example, in the past, they were mostly lured by newspaper job ads for dancers or waitresses abroad but today it's different - it happens mostly through a close romantic relationship. Nowadays trafficking happens not so much through severe violence or kidnappings but through a more subtle deception - as I said, often through acquaintances or a romantic relationship. Also, many victims of trafficking now know that they will be working in the sex industry abroad. But we need to make a clear distinction here - they leave with the intention of working in the sex industry and not of being exploited. The characteristics of human trafficking are very clear - deception, coercion, violence, exploitation...

- How do you help victims of labour exploitation? 

- Bulgaria has a serious problem with labour migration. We know that many people go for work abroad but are not aware of the risks of being exploited. Unfortunately many Bulgarians who migrate for work do not check carefully the source of the job ads or their rights in the destination country. Unlike women who've been sexually exploited, victims of labour exploitation don't always need accommodation in a crisis centre or psychological counselling, but they need to know their rights and claim them and we can help them with this and, if necessary, connect them with a lawyer. 

- How do victims come into contact with Animus? 

- Usually through our broad network of partner organisations abroad. There is usually a police raid, where victims are identified and referred to counselling centres. There they can stay for different periods of time and explore their options - whether they can and want to stay in the country or come back to Bulgaria. If they decide to come back, the partner organisation connects them to us. We meet them literally at the airport and take it up from there. Trafficked persons more rarely seek help on their own initiative. As you know, Animus Association manages the only crisis centre in Sofia for survivors of violence. In the past 15 years it has accommodated 1600 women and children victims of violence and trafficking and almost 3000 have used the crisis intervention and counselling programmes. 

- What kind of people are usually vulnerable to being trafficked? 

- It's different for the different forms of trafficking. For sexual exploitation usually young women are recruited. I can't say that there is a clear tendency that they are Roma. It's more or less 50/50 from the people that our organisation has supported. These are women who want to improve their lives, who seek better future. When human trafficking for labour exploitation is concerned, the age group and the gender is usually different. Both men and women, also in their 30's and 40's, are exploited in agriculture, construction or as domestic help... Of course, children are also trafficked. Here there is a clear tendency that they are from Roma origin and are usually exploited for begging and petty crime, which is also a form of human trafficking. 

- Is there a specific case of a victim of human trafficking that particularly moved you? 

- I can say that lately we've been working with very difficult cases of women who have been trafficked because of their extreme vulnerability. We work more and more often with victims with mental illnesses that hinder their perception of reality and risks. They've been abused because of their illness. Other difficult situations are those where the victims are completely illiterate. They can't read or write, they don't know in which countries they've been or which borders they crossed. In both cases we are talking about people who don't know how to help themselves or claim their rights. 

- What advice would you give to people planning to go abroad? 

- Everyone has the right to be happy and to seek their happiness abroad. We do not judge anyone for the choices they make. When people strongly desire something, they are likely to forget about the risks or to underestimate even their own "gut feeling" that something is not right. People should trust their intuition and their support networks. If they have even the slightest suspicion of possible abuse, they should not ignore it but take precautionary measures. I would advise everyone to not be afraid to claim their rights and to contact the respective authorities. This is the only way to receive help, if in need. Our hotline +359 2 981 7686 is also always available. 

Кой е по- по- най-

Преди няколко месеца Twitter ми беше избухнал с историята на Моника Джоунс - студентка по Социални дейности в Университета на Аризона, активист за транс права и права на проституиращите и "a trans woman of colour". Моника е била спирана от полицията или арестувана в подозрения за проституция, в общи линии само заради профилирането на черните транс жени. Точно това определение "trans woman of colour" ме замисли и накара да пиша този пост. Замислих се, че аз дори и да "трябва" да се определя като гей, не трябва да определям расата, половата идентичност и пола си. Т.е. "бял", "cis" (cis е, най-накратко казано, обратното на транс - когато се идентифицираш с пола, с който си роден) и "мъж" някакси се подразбират. Замислих се и за "привилегията" - отново покрай туитове и блогове - че макар и гей аз, като бял цис мъж, съм много по-привилегирован от ... на практика мнозинството хора в света (жени, не-бели хора и транс хора). "Привилегията" се изразява в отношението на обществото (като цяло, колкото и абстрактно да звучи това) към теб, и задоволяването на базисните нужди от подслон, работа, връзки с хора, принадлежност към групи и т.н.

Разбира се, като цяло можем да приемем, че белият хетеросексуален (цис) мъж християнин е най-привилегированият екземпляр на света. С условието, че цветът и религията са локализирани, т.е. в арабската, китайската, индийската и т.н. култури се има предвид доминантните религия и цвят на кожата. Та се зачудих, по един малко детински начин, ако премахнем религията, кой е по- по- най-привилегирован и кой е по- по- най-ощетен/дискриминиран? Или какво стои в "хранителната верига" между дъното (черна транс жена) и върха (бял хетеро цис мъж)? 

От дуалистична гледан точка нещата са ясни - мъж надцаква жена, бял надцаква черен, цис надцаква транс и хетеро надцаква хомо. Но какво става когато са смесени? 

Та с условието, че въпросите са глупави и безмислени, че цис се подразбира, а цветът на кожата е условен, как се степенува привилегията? 

- Бяла хетеро жена по-добре ли е от черен (гей или хетеро) мъж? - според мен не - пол бие цвят
- Бяла хетеро жена по-добре ли е от (бял или черен) гей мъж?  - може би в Източна Европа да, но в Западна и САЩ - хм, може би не - мъж идва преди жена
- Бял транс мъж по-добре ли е от черна лесбийка? - според мен не - цис бие бял

и така нататък... 

Затова следващия път когато се почувстваме дискриминирани, можем да си спомним, че ние белите цис мъже, дори и гей, пак сме доста нагоре в хранителната верига. За разлика от нас, някои хора не могат да скрият чертите си и наистина имат ограничен достъп до ресурси и възможности, биват профилирани и тормозени от полицията, гонени от общностите и домовете си и т.н. 

И когато се борим за равни права трябва да чуем и по-непривилегированите от нас. 

Slavery, sex trafficking, exploitation and child labour - some nuances

Slavery

In the latest episode of Game of Thrones (season 4, episode 10), an old man comes to Daenerys the Targaryen to share his grievance. Daenerys had recently freed the slaves of Mereen and become Queen of the city. However, the peasant doesn't find this action as noble as we and Danny would like to think... You should really see the scene, it's just 2.5 minutes, until around 3:05, because I don't want to type the whole thing and it's very interesting but embedding is disabled for this video, so I can't put it here. But in short, the man explains that when he was a slave, he had a roof over his head and was a teacher to his master's children. Now he's a free man but "he's nothing" and lives on the streets. The conditions in the shelters and food banks (or whatever they are called) that Danny set up, apparently are difficult. "With my master I was a teacher. I had the respect and love of his children", he says. "Your Grace, I ask you to let me sell myself back to Master xxx" is what he wants. "There are many outside, waiting to beg the same of you", he adds. In her infinite wisdom and heavenly gorgeousness, the Mother of Dragons agrees to grant him his request: "... But freedom means making your own choices. I will allow you to sign a contract with your former master..." The man is grateful and exits. (Seriously, though, see the scene, very interesting exchange).

Daenerys freeing the slaves of Mereen a few weeks ago was a beautiful and epic scene (you can see if from this moment or watch the whole video if you like GoT). And what she did was brave, noble and just and so on. And she gave choice and purpose to the previous slaves she freed - they now stand behind her as her soldiers on their own free will. But here in Mereen we have a moral dilemma. Is slavery wrong, degrading and against human dignity? - Of course! Was this man better off as a slave than as a free man? - I think he would say "Of course"!  Or to paraphrase Milton, is it really and always better to be a free man in Hell than serve in Heaven? Are freedom and independence a "one size fits all" solution? 

Similarly in the anti-trafficking world, I notice more and more often the nuances in the personal experiences of trafficked people. What is voluntary and what is forced? Should you submit yourself to exploitation when you have no other means to support yourself and your family? Is it a crime to help a person find a job and then demand payback for your time and efforts? Like the old man from GoT, are the Cambodian prostitutes rescued by Somaly Mam better off as garment factory workers than as "sex slaves"? Who defines the line between helping your parents, and by extension, yourself, and being "deprived of your childhood" through child labour? If people don't regard themselves as victims, why are we so quick to label them "victims", based on definitions and indicators? 

Of course I am fully aware of the cases of trafficking, exploitation, slavery and child labour involving violence, abuse and coercion, but I would like to share my thoughts here on the more grey areas, the nuances, the situations that are wrong from the point of view of the law, the outsiders and society in general, but are more complex from the point of view of the individual that we perceive as the victim. 

Sex trafficking 

This part is pretty much just a shorter version of "Who are these human traffickers?" by Felicia Anna. Anna is a Romanian sex worker in the Amsterdam Red Light District and as such she cannot be dismissed as "unrepresentative" since everyone in The Netherlands will tell you that the majority of prostitutes come from Eastern European. In her blog Anna writes about another side of the Red Light District - one that you will rarely see in anti-trafficking studies. And about the nuances in "sex trafficking". Her post is quite detailed, so I will try to present the idea more concisely here. Whether this is Anna's story or not, I don't know, but I'm sure it's the story of a lot of women (and at least some men) who come to The Netherlands to sell sex. A low-level street/highway prostitute in, for example, my home country Bulgaria, doesn't make a lot of money - from what I've heard, it's 5-10 Euros for a blowjob, and not more than 25 for intercourse and because of the uncertain legal status, prostitutes are often arrested and forced to give sexual services to policemen to avoid being detained. So imagine that a friend or an acquaintance tells one such girl that in the Netherlands she can earn 10 times more and do her job legally. She wants to but she doesn't have any money to move, to settle down, doesn't speak a foreign language and doesn't know the procedures how to get started. He offers to help her - to lend her money, arrange documents, find a place for her to live, a place to work... for a certain price, of course. Now add together the price of a plane ticket, (at least) one month's rent and one deposit, costs for legalisation of a birth certificate, costs for the Chamber of Commerce, for renting a window and who knows what else, and you easily come to 3000 Euros or more, including the cost of the "friend's" time and help. And since she can't start making money as soon as she lands at Schiphol but at least one month later (if everything is to be legal and right) she actually starts off with a huge debt and has to work long hours and meet a lot of men to clear that debt. If, for whatever reason, she can't pay this debt regularly, the "friend" becomes abusive. Now personally I'm not prone to violence and I'm convinced that violence is not the answer but there have been occasions when friends have owed me 1000-2000 Euros for months on and I've really wished I were bigger, stronger and more violent! I mean, banks and other institutional creditors have their ways of getting their money back, right? And they have millions of Euros and plenty of time to wait, while private people - not so much.. Again, I don't condone violence, but I also think that when you borrow money you have to repay it or face the consequences. In anti-trafficking terminology we call this debt bondage and coercion, but in this case, is it really so much different in effect from other business transactions involving credit? 

In my previous job at an NGO providing services to victims of violence in Bulgaria, we would often meet victims of trafficking who refused counselling, shelter or any other services and refused to press charges - they just wanted to go back home (and in some cases probably find another way to migrate to sell sex). Perhaps they were deceived, abused and exploited but did they perceive themselves as victims? - No. And it wasn't necessarily because of dissociation or denial, the trauma, PTSD, Stockholm syndrome or threats of retaliation. It's because they saw the whole experience as going abroad to find a job and make money and ... failing. So then who are we to tell them they're victims more than any of us are victims of society, social prejudice or... capitalism? Why do we claim to know better than them who they are and what they need? 


In the interest of readability, I will continue about labour exploitation and child labour in another post (I've been told my posts are too long!:-) 

A daily dose of hate - the Wicked Witch from the Northwest

In the week before the Bulgarian elections for European Parliament I stumbled upon the Facebook page of a strange creature - Irena Borisova - an EP candidate from the "Green Party" (therefore - the "wicked witch":-) from the town of Vidin (therefore - from the Northwest:-). On her Facebook page Ms. Borisova had listed what she stands "for" and "against" as a politician. I sympathise with the green cause and traditionally vote green - both here in Amsterdam and in the national elections in Bulgaria (although - for another Green Party). So I agreed with many of her points - more green energy, support for local agricultural production, against the TTIP... But then, seemingly out of nowhere, she was also against "the decadent moral tendencies in Western Europe (gay marriages, incest, paedophilia)". Now this is just an insult to common sense - first of all, there's no such thing as a "gay marriage", it's the same as the "straight marriage" but between people of the same sex; secondly - to put it together with incest and paedophilia is pure populism, as I already wrote in my posts Prostituto part 1 and Part 2; third - to claim that these are "Western values" is beyond populistic, it's Putinesque; and lastly - to hear this from a green politician is a disgrace, to say the least. Just that same day the European Greens had boasted on Facebook that their EP group has supported 100% all policies on LGBT rights. And Ms. Borisova's party is part of the European Greens. Naturally, I immediately informed the European Greens and the Greens in EP on Facebook and Twitter about Ms. Borisova's "principles" and apparently I wasn't the only one who did. They thanked me for bringing this to their attention and assured me that they would "look into it". Of course, I doubt that they can influence the choice of candidates from a national green party or a candidate's convictions but I felt somewhat satisfied that I've ratted her out to them. 

Anyway, I also wasn't the first one to notice this strange outburst of homophobia by the wicked witch. My friend L. had already engaged her in an argument, pointing out the same concerns as I had - that she's green and that it's a "nonsense to put these three things [gay marriage, incest and paedophilia] together". The witch replied that it's not nonsense and it's not even only these three things - "because lately in Western Europe it's become fashionable to open up brothels with animals and demonstrate sexual intercourse in front of 3-4-year-old children". O.M.G! While I can agree that there are all sorts of people in the world and such establishments may exist somewhere in Western Europe, I'm more than certain that they'll also exist in other parts of the world and are in no way a "fashion" but completely illegal. Actually I don't want to comment on the ridiculous claims that the wicked witch makes, I'm sure anyone who reads this will understand me, but I want to list a few other, simply to demonstrate the level of political thought and speech in that place I call my birth country and because the more she tried to engage us in that argument, the sillier she seemed.

Two years later we still haven't ticked the others...

 "Scientists have proved that 'special inclinations' [i.e. homosexuality and transsexuality] are a mental disorder, actually - a disease. As I often say, I don't care who goes to bed with whom, but to demonstrate it through parades, to involve children in this and to insist on legalising something, which nature itself shows is abnormal - to me this is unacceptable!". But the next one was my favourite because it made me laugh so hard: "You are trying to present me as a homophobe? Homophobe comes from the Latin 'fobus' which means 'hatred' and I don't hate gay people". Well, for anyone who didn't guess it - I had to laugh because there is no Latin word 'fobus', the word comes from the Greek "phobia" - fear. And of course, that the statements she makes are completely homophobic. When I use big words and make claims about their meaning or origin and I'm sitting at my computer, I always bother to check Wikipedia or a dictionary before I speak - it's a simple question of dignity and it takes one minute. <rant>But I suppose to the wicked witch, wikiPEDIa is just another decadent western tendency.. It must come from the Babylonian word wiki - a space where people add, delete and modify stuff in collaboration with others, and the Mayan pedos - child :D Or as the Mesopotamians would say, ergo, it must be a space in Western Europe and America where children are gang-raped in front of animals for the enjoyment of married homosexuals. </rant>

After my comments that I've informed the European Greens about her position on LGBT rights, the wicked witch made it clear a few times that this is just "her own opinion", to which she has a right (just like we have the right to be gay, she graciously added) and that her party does not necessarily support this position. Now I know that politics is a dirty business everywhere in the world and sometimes has nothing to do with principles, ideas and policies, but in the "rotten West", at least on the outside, there are certain expectations from political parties and their members - that a right wing politician will want to curb immigration, that a left wing politician will want to tax the rich, that a green politician will want less nuclear energy... that sort of things. And I don't know why but I somehow expect that a green politician will also support LGBT rights, but maybe I've been brainwashed from living in Western Europe for too long. So I started wondering, where is the fine line between "party line" and personal opinion? Obviously, everyone is entitled to their own opinion and only in a dictatorship all members of a certain political party always agree on all issues. But there must also be certain continuity and predictability in politics, methinks. Otherwise, another colleague of the green witch will suddenly say it's his own opinion that we need to explore shale gas extraction, another one - that he supports more nuclear energy but that's just his own opinion, right? How can you then make up your mind if you want to vote for this party or this politician?

But as the Phoenician astronomer William Shakespeare pointed out, "all is well that ends well" - the wicked witch was, of course, not elected for EP - her party received 7989 votes (0.357%), while the witch herself - 50 preferential votes, which sounds like the extended family and a few besties and fellow-biggots from the North-west. Still, a well-known homophobe from an even more populist party did make it into EP. But the real Persian tragedy is that this level of ignorance and homophobia is so commonplace in politics and society, and not only in Bulgaria... 

--- 
Although I already gave credit for the title in the previous "Daily dose of hate" post, let's do it again: 
"A daily dose of hate" is a Facebook page and a blog I follow, which I think are maintained by my distant acquaintance Magdalina Genova - a brilliant blogger (in Bulgarian) and sort of a political and social activist for all things good and fair. Magdalina and I are born on the same date - 30 March - and while I know personally about four more people born on this date, Magdalina's blog sometimes sounds like my thoughts - always annoyed/angry at and ranting about some injustice in the world or another. If you can understand Bulgarian and care about politics and justice - I recommend it. 

Prostituto - part 2

So, to continue my rant about prostitution and the similarities between the anti-sex work and anti-LGBT discourses... 

Out of sight - out of mind

Invisible man

As I mentioned in part 1, in Bulgaria (for example) there are a lot of tolerant, compassionate and progressive people, who don't want to see all LGBT people dead or in a mental institution. Or anywhere else, for that matter. A typical statement you can read in message boards and comments under news articles is "I have nothing against gay people but I don't understand why they have to parade their sexuality" or "I don't discriminate against anyone, let them do whatever they want in their bedrooms but not go out on the streets and demonstrate their sexual orientation". (And believe me, this IS a tolerant attitude over there!) These sentiments are repeated at the highest political and social levels. In 2008, before the first organised and largely promoted Sofia gay pride, the then Prime Minister, now chair of the Bulgarian Socialist Party and the Party of European Socialists, Sergei Stanishev, when asked about the pride parade, said that the Bulgarian government fights discrimination and protects the rights of all its citizens but "personally, I don't like the demonstration and manifestation of such orientations". [On an irrelevant but related note: rumour is that Stanishev himself is gay and has (had?) a relationship with the current Foreign MInister Vigenin...] Under pressure from united nazis and Christians, the then mayor Boyko Borisov moved the pride march from the city centre to a more invisible place outside the centre (and later moved it again back to the city centre...). A couple of years later, when Borisov was Prime Minister, he stated that "in GERB [his party] men love women and women love men". Yes, in his party, there are no LGBT people. 

Invisible woman

The anti-sex work debate usually focuses on street prostitution and the abuses that street workers face. Even though some estimate that street prostitution accounts for not more than 20% of all prostitution, the anti's love focusing on this 20% to make their point, disregarding the other 80%, which includes call girls, escorts, webcam workers, etc. who are far more high-level, protected and well paid and where trafficking, abuse and exploitation occur much less often. So it seems the main goal of the anti's is to see street prostitution disappear, i.e. to simply not see any sex workers. But the main way in which sex workers are made invisible is by ignoring their voices. When it comes to policies around sex work, real, actual, active, present- or past-day sex workers are largely ignored, in favour of fake "survivors of prostitution". The Council of Europe Rapporteur I mentioned in the previous part is a perfect example. 

By making any group invisible and ignoring it as small or unrepresentative, governments, policy makers and society find it easier to ignore the group's demands, rights and needs, instead of improving laws and policies that actually protect them. 

When they say your sister is a whore... 

There's a saying in Bulgarian that goes along the lines of "When they say your sister is a whore, you can't prove anymore that you don't have a sister". It sounds a lot wittier actually but the idea is that once a claim/rumour is out there, it's really difficult to disprove it as false, even if it's something as simple as the fact that you don't have a sister.

In any debate it's easy to spread rumours and unfounded and unprovable claims but it gets worse when you employ rheological fallacies, which make it seem like your claim is or can be true. In the anti-LGBT (or rather, anti-gay) discourse there are plenty of unprovable claims like "God hates fags" or "75% of gay men have had sex with more than 1500 men" or "Gay prides are not about rights but pure pornography" but I will mention here a few recent and very absurd ones designed purely to create a moral panic, which on the outside, to the dumb reader, may appear to be substantiated. 

- The EU wants to legalise incest seems to be another legitimate sounding rumour. The EU and US and their human rights are, of course, the worst enemies of Bulgarian, Russian, Serbian, etc. law-abiding orthodox Christians and it follows that after legalising same-sex marriages, the next logical step is legalising incest, peadophilia and zoophilia. Just last year I heard at an unfortunate encounter in Bulgaria that "The European Parliament is now discussing measures to legalise incest because the Nordic countries, especially Norway and Iceland, are pushing for it". The idea that the EU will have a say in incest and even "legalise" it may sound legit to some but that Norway and Iceland are in the EU is simple ignorance with which you just can't argue (or next you'll find yourself trying to convince someone that Africa is a continent or that the Earth is round..) The rumour itself was started by a crazy Russian woman who claimed that her Norwegian husband and his family molested their son and the social workers and the whole state actually encouraged paedophilia and incest and then spread like wildfire in all Putinesque media and circles. So someone heard a fake story about incest in Norway and decided that the EU will legalise incest and that incest and paedophilia are "Western values".

Jamie and Cersei at a hearing in the EP...

I would probably find it more believable if someone told me that Jamie and Cersei Lannister are lobbying the EU to legalise incest than Norway and Iceland :-) 

- The Netherlands is a country of gays and paedophiles. The Netherlands was the first country in the world to legalise same-sex marriages and is also popular for its liberal stance on marijuana use and, of course, prostitution. The Dutch government, its embassies and Dutch foundations fund a lot of LGBT initiatives around the world, including contributions to all gay prides in Sofia. In the narrow minds of extreme conservatives and Christians this makes the whole country worse than Sodom and Gomorrah. But my example - in 2013 the Bulgarian judiciary organised a seminar with Dutch experts on improving the workload of magistrates. A recently leaked letter from a high-level magistrate quotes his reasons to decline the invitation: "I see that there will be a Dutch expert. As you know, this country is ruled by gays and they also have a paedophile party, which is making its way to Parliament"... While there are open LGBT people in Dutch politics, none are in the government and you can hardly claim that the country is ruled by gays (of course the claim itself is preposterous enough). The mere existence of Association Martijn, however, allows all anti's to use it as "proof" that the country is infested with paedophiles (and by extension - gays). In reality, the association is not a political party, has hardly any support, let alone trying to make it to Parliament or have any sort of power. It's been banned and unbanned a few times and in April 2014 it was banned for good. But once the claim is out there - no one cares about these "details". The magistrate who refused to allow a Dutch expert to teach the "Orthodox, traditional-value" and completely rotten Bulgarian judiciary was awarded 40 monthly salaries upon his retirement in 2014. 

Lastly, I want to share my frustration with the campaign for EP elections in Bulgaria - if you listen to some of the candidates and their messages you'll get the impression that next year the EU will force every Bulgarian to marry someone of the same gender and then have sex with animals in front of kindergartens every morning... 

In the anti-prostitution discourse there are even more ridiculous but legit-sounding claims that seem founded in "carefully selected" research. Maggie McNeill has a long list of them in her blog and in the Washington Post and Dr. Ronald Weitzer more here. 

But to mention a few for my readers: 

- The average age for entry into prostitution is 12-14 years 

As Maggie points out, this is first of all a mathematical impossibility because it suggests that for every sex worker who started at 20, there's one who started at 6 to 8... Or for every one who started at 24 there's one who started at ... 0 to 4. It took me five seconds to do the math but the myth is more important than the math... Anyway, it seems the myth refers to a study of the first sexual experience of minors. And minors are always below the age of 18 but myth or math - who cares, let's create a moral panic..

- In The Netherlands 50-90% of sex workers are forced. 

This is another commonly repeated lie because (apart from "the Dutch are always to blame":) it came from an Amsterdam city official in 2009 which was not based on anything but a simple guesstimate. In reality, a 2007 official evaluation on the lifting of the ban on brothels found out that around 8% of the interviewed sex workers said they had started under some form of coercion. Sex workers in the Red Light District will tell you that the forced prostitutes are even fewer than this. 

- More than half of Amsterdam brothel owners have criminal records. This is not one that's particularly pervasive internationally but I'm including it because of its utter distortion and absurdity. It was used in the reasoning behind the European Parliament resolution on prostitution from the end of February 2014. When real researchers actually bothered to trace this claim they found that: it wasn't about Amsterdam but only part of the Red Light District; it wasn't more than half but less than one-third; and the most spectacular one - it wasn't about brothel owners but about coffee shop (where they sell marijuana) owners... But when you start your sentence with "A 2009 study found out that..." and don't provide proper references, you can get away with it, even if you're a Member of the European Parliament. 

The anti's will always find rumours, hear-say or unfounded claims to further their agenda. Luckily, there are also always diligent researchers and activists who are ready to refute these claims, but once it's out there - most people react to the scandalous, the morally outrageous claim and can hardly ever be convinced that the reality is different. But of course - no victory comes easily... 

Tempters, homewreckers and sinners!

Now this part came a bit unexpectedly, I hadn't thought about it until I got into a sort of an argument in the comments of the blog post "Does legalised prostitution really increase human trafficking in Germany" on FeministIre. A certain georgefinnegan was one of few very vocal commenters against sex work. At first I thought the guy was just conservative or religious but from several different comments, something here, something there, I was left with the impression that he objects to prostitution because prostitutes sleep with married men, therefore they ruin marriages, therefore their job is a disgrace to society and traditions, therefore it shouldn't exist, let alone be legal (in a way it's a refreshing attitude not rooted in the "victims of human trafficking" or "violence against women" paradigm). In another comment, george had admitted to talking to a prostitute once, even flirting with her. All of this made me assume, whether correctly or not, that he actually wanted to visit a sex worker and use her services but didn't because of moral considerations (and I admire his level of restraint in the name of fidelity and marriage!). We also know, although I can't quote sources now, that the people who most vehemently oppose LGBT rights are often people who themselves have homosexual desires. I'm sure that, like me, a lot of gays and lesbians have had sex with married men and women but to shift the responsibility only to gays, lesbians or sex workers for people's infidelity is simply not serious - it's a two-way consensual and conscious interaction. People who want to cheat will cheat, be it with sex workers, people of the same sex, or their secretary or possibly anyone they come in contact with. Obviously we can't ban interpersonal communication to prevent cheating. And while with gays and lesbians these outside-marriage activities have the potential to cause romantic complications, with sex workers it's actually just a business transaction. But some straight and bi men and women prefer to have an easy scapegoat, which they can blame for their failed marriages/relationships instead of making an effort to understand what's wrong and work it out or leave and try to be happy with someone else... Someone had told me that this is why so few men actually support sex workers rights - because they are scared that they will appear to want to use sex workers' services (whether they actually do or not). Needless to say, in the same way in backward countries like Bulgaria, so few straight people defend LGBT rights, again out of fear of being perceived as gay/lesbian themselves. 

IDAHO - Ай-да-го....

IDAHO - ай-да-го...

I've been planning to write this post for a long time and decided to post it today, on the International Day against Homophobia and Transphobia (IDAHO), because of what happened a year ago. The Bulgarian part of the title is supposed to be a word play - it sounds like IDAHO but means something like "screw it" - to express my annoyance better... 

So on IDAHO 2013, the EU Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA) presented the findings of the largest EU LGBT survey. More than 93 000 LGBT people from all over the EU responded to the survey, whose aim was to study their experiences with discrimination, hate crimes, hate speech, access to justice, etc. The results of the survey showed that violence, discrimination and hate speech are still wide spread in the EU, while the majority are not reported to the authorities. You can see the results in different graphs here  and here or just some of the main findings in this three-minute video.

 But just to mention some main points: around 50% of respondents felt discriminated on the basis of their sexual orientation and 90% of them did not report this to the authorities; around 66% avoided holding hands in public; 80% had heard jokes about LGBT people and felt insulted; 20% had felt discriminated at work or when looking for work; around 25% had been attacked because of their sexual orientation. And so on. When it comes to trans* people all these numbers are even higher. 

Now you're probably wondering what exactly annoyed me so much... Well, it was the "surprise" with which these results were met. I watched live the conference where the survey results were presented - here in The Hague, at the closing of a two-day conference organised by the Dutch government and attended by, among others, (then) Princess Maxima, Members of the European Parliament, ILGA Europe and EU Justice Commissioner Viviane Reding. Unfortunately I can't find now a recording of this part of the event but I got really annoyed by the reactions to the survey findings. The MEPs and Reding were acting all surprised, shocked, flabbergasted and what not by the results. They had no idea that homophobia, discrimination, hate speech and hate crimes were so widespread in the EU. They expressed their direst concerns about the position of LGBT people, their strongest condemnation of discrimination and their continued commitment to the improvement of LGBT rights in the EU... I thought that even ILGA Europe's participation was in the same weak "oh this is so terrible, we had no idea" style, even though they publish an annual review of LGBT rights in Europe, called Rainbow Europe, which pretty much confirms the same findings every year. 

I think if you ask any random 20 LGBT people on the street you'll get exactly the same responses about their experiences. Of course I know that official data, based on almost 100 000 responses, is important and necessary and more reliable, but if you live in this world, don't pretend that you don't know how wide spread homophobia is! 

The most reasonable and honest comment I heard at the conference came from Michael Cashman, a British MEP, chair of the Intergroup on LGBT rights in the EP. Cashman said that we need to address the elephant in the room - that there was "political cowardice" among many of his fellow MEPs to work for the improvement of the situation of LGBT people because, even if they support our rights, they still want to be re-elected... And, as we know, LGBT rights is a controversial and unpopular issue in many countries and among many people. Of course this little outburst of honesty was pacified by Reding with some more bla bla about a roadmap, strategy and all sorts of future tenses.. So I tweeted 

#euLGBTsurvey indeed the commission is all about bla bla rights, bla bla concerns, bla bla roadmap... TIME TO ACT and not just BLA BLA!
— Bobby Gerasimov (@BobbyGerasimov) May 17, 2013

Whether in response to my tweet or not, Reding went on to explain what the Commission is doing to further LGBT rights (sorry for not remembering the important details): "Now we're doing ... and this is NOT BLA BLA; then we'll do ... and this is NOT BLA BLA"... However, I remain unconvinced... This survey, whose results were, like I said, obvious and predictable to anyone who cares to ask, was commissioned in 2011, carried out in 2012 and presented in 2013. The EU roadmap against homophobia and discrimination was voted by the Parliament in 2014 but it still has no legislative value. To move forward, the Commission needs to come up with a binding directive, which will then need to be transposed by the member states within, let's say 3 years... At this pace, I wonder if the EU will actually do anything on this matter in my lifetime. Even something as simple (in my opinion) as Member States recognising the civil status of same-sex couples from other Member States, regardless of their domestic marriage legislation. I mean, isn't it ridiculous that if I'm married to a man in the Netherlands, this man will be my no-one in Bulgaria and most other EU countries? Whether we decide to move and live there or just go on holidays and I have to visit him in a hospital? If you have a car, a property, a spouse of the opposite sex, a child or a bank account in one member state you have them in all of the EU but a spouse of the same sex you can have in only certain countries? I mean, even the US went further in this direction and I always thought we in the EU were a bit more ahead when it comes to human rights and civil liberties...

But, the fight continues and let's hope that one day... 

Bulgaria's new "tougher policy" towards illegal immigration

Last week I read this article in Capital.bg (in Bulgarian - title "The Cabinet is preparing a tougher policy towards illegal immigrants") about the Bulgarian government's new policy plans and then I also read the press release of the Ministry of Interior (in English).

First I want to clarify that I will use the more humane term "undocumented/irregular migrant(s)" because no person is illegal, migrant or not. What a person does (e.g. cross a border without the proper documents) may be illegal but the person him/herself cannot be illegal. Sadly, the Bulgarian government and media still use the outdated term "illegal immigrants".

So the first thing I noticed when reading the press release of MoI is the confusing information about the new plans - the title states "for solving the issue with the increased migration pressure", while the first sentence explains that the aim of the plan is to manage "the crisis resulting from a massive influx of asylum seekers". Then the first measure talks about "illegal immigrants", while the second - about refugees. The fact that one policy is supposed to address these very different groups - undocumented migrants, asylum seekers and refugees - is worrying in itself.

Then the first objective of the plan is "... to limit the number of entering people and accelerate the rate of removal from the territory of those who have no reason to be here". Now "having no reason to be [t]here" is a bit of an oversimplification - surely no one just wandered off across the border and reached Bulgaria. But back to the point - the article in Capital explains in more detail - "the government’s goal is to reduce three times the number of people entering the country illegally and at the same time increase three times the number of people who have been expelled from Bulgaria". Reading this target that the Ministry of Interior has set, my first thought is that anyone without the proper documents, including victims of human trafficking, refugees and asylum seekers, will be immediately treated as an undocumented migrant and expelled, without much concern about his/her human rights and personal situation, simply in order to meet the targets, proclaim the new plan as a success and justify the need for more funds, equipment and manpower. This suspicion becomes even more real by another planned measure (mentioned only in the article of Capital), namely, significantly shorter periods for removal of undocumented migrants. The combination of shorter periods and a target of more removals is a recipe for human rights violations. And to illustrate my concerns, I recently read a country study on the position of victims of trafficking in the criminal and other legal proceedings in Bulgaria (not yet published) where I found this short example:

On 30 October 2003, two women, who had been trafficked to Macedonia for prostitution, managed to escape. Two unfamiliar persons took them across the border on foot, but not through the official check point but through the woods, after which they were detained by the Bulgarian border police officers. The victims told their story to the border police officers and were identified as trafficked persons, however, they were transported to the Kyustendil District Court and sentenced in a speedy proceedings for “illegal crossing of the border” – crime under Article 279 (1) of the Criminal Code [...] [...] the Bulgarian Helsinki Committee (Sofia) lobbies for the abolishment of Article 279 (1), which is also widely applied in regard to refugees. They argue that it is a simply structured crime easy to prove – the person must be on Bulgarian territory – and the border police officers use it to increase their investigation rate...

If identified victims of trafficking, Bulgarian nationals, can be prosecuted by the authorities for illegal crossing of the border to "increase their investigation rate", why should we expect anything different for foreign nationals, who cross the border illegally as refugees or asylum seekers. And the media often reports on the deficiencies (in capacity, funds and staff) of the State Agency for Refugees, which even at the moment cannot cope with the influx of Syrian refugees and they are forced to wait for months (while living in terrible conditions) before their applications are processed and they are granted refugee status. But like I said, the need to speed up the process in order to meet the targets, is likely to result in ... well, just very sloppy work!

The second measure of the government's plan includes "increased police presence ... in the areas populated by refugees." However, Capital.bg refers to this measure as "specialised police raids in areas ...". Whichever way you read it, it means simply police harassment over anyone looking at least remotely Arab (which are allegedly the majority of refugees, asylum seekers and undocumented migrants). The police is obliged to protect society with all its members, not only the Bulgarian citizens and not only against refugees and undocumented migrants. But by pointing specifically at refugees/migrants as potential criminals and a threat to Bulgarian citizens, the government is actually starting and stimulating the vicious circle of scapegoating, prejudice, suspicion and social exclusion which only leads to more violence. This is the opposite of the intended integration - it's downright segregation!

Another planned measure, not mentioned in the press release but already under-way, is the construction of a 30-kilometre fence on the border with Turkey. 25 years after the fall of the Iron Curtain, Bulgaria is building a wall to prevent people from coming in, as if we don't remember what the consequences and human costs of the other wall were... The measure was already criticised by the Council of Europe's Human Rights Commissioner Nils Muiznieks who insists that Bulgaria cannot deny entry of Syrian refugees and that walls are expensive but don't do much good.

Lastly, in the past few months there have been a number of instances of hate speech and hate crimes against undocumented migrants, asylum seekers and refugees. Only a week ago there were three anti-immigrant rallies in Sofia in the same day, organised by different right-wing, nationalistic and football fans groups, including one parliamentary political party, which shouted racial slurs and carried slogans that I don't even want to describe here. The media had a big role to play here too by allowing deranged politicians (again, from a parliamentary party) to describe the Syrian refugees as "terrorists", "man-slaughterers", "AIDS-carriers" who want to turn Bulgaria into a Muslim nation. 

It pains me to say that what I thought was a humanitarian crisis (the influx of Syrian refugees) to which Bulgarians would demonstrate compassion and hospitality, has turned the bigger part of society into raging, blood-thirsty hate-mongers. Bulgaria has always prided itself with the fact that it did not follow Kosovo and Bosnia in the 90's and that in the centre of Sofia, within one square kilometre, there are an Orthodox church, a Catholic cathedral, a mosque and a synagogue which coexist peacefully. Now it seems that the "infamous Bulgarian tolerance" (as the politicians like to call it) has simply vanished, just at a time when it is actually needed! 

Моят имейл до Антония Първанова - член на Европейския Парламент относно участието й в Brussels call

Европейското женско лоби (European Women's Lobby) отдавна води кръстоносен поход срещу проституцията. Последната им инициатива е Brussels Call - Together for a Europe free from Prostitution, чрез която се опитват да привлекат и членове на Европейския Парламент (ЧЕП-ове:) на своя страна. За щастие засега са само 40-тина, основно от Швеция, Дания и Франция, но кой знае докъде могат да стигнат.. Някой друг път смятам да размишлявам по-надълго за проституцията и правата на проституиращите, както и за псевдоморалистичните, аз-знам-по-добре-от-теб-от-какво-имаш-нужда кръстоносни походи, но сега само ще сложа писмото си до Антония Първанова, Ивайло Калфин и Мария Неделчева - българските евродепутати, които подкрепят тази малоумна инициатива.

Уважаема госпожо Първанова, 

Дълбоко съм разочарован и загрижен от Вашето участие в Brussels Call - инициатива на European Women's Lobby, която цели, чрез подвеждащи или направо лъжливи твърдения, още повече да маргинализира и стигматизира проституиращите жени и мъже, да ги лиши от малкото възможности за социална и здравна грижа и да ги направи още по-уязвими към насилие и експлоатация. Аз вярвам, че усилията ни трябва да бъдат насочени към борбата срещу трафика на хора и принудителния труд (не само в проституцията) и към закрилата на човешките права на всички хора и особено на най-уязвимите групи, каквито са проституиращите. В този процес трябва да бъдат чути и самите проституиращи, тъй като те най-добре знаят от какво имат нужда и как да бъдат защитени правата им, а не да бъдат заклеймявани като безпомощни жертви, които трябва да бъдат спасени, като хора без собствено достойнство и без право на избор. Трафикът на хора просперира най-вече в нерегулираните или слаборегулирани трудови сектори, каквато е секс индустрията, но също така земеделието, строителството, ресторантьорството и т.н. Да твърдим, че борейки се с трафика ние трябва да се борим с проституцията е като да тръгнем на кръстоносен поход срещу, например, строителството, земеделието или миграцията. Вместо това аз вярвам, че трябва да се концентрираме първо върху предоставянето на превантивна информация на уязвимите групи и второ - по-добрата регулация на тези сектори. Криминализирането на които и да било аспекти на проституцията (самите проституиращи или пък техните клиенти) прави секс индустрията само още по-невъзможна за регулиране и участниците в нея - още по-уязвими към насилие и експлоатация. Дебатът за проституцията трябва да се води без истерични псевдоморализъм и религиозна етика и на базата на реални, разумни и академични изследвания и данни. 

Позволявам си тук да добавя и апела, подготвен от организации защитаващи правата на проституиращите:

---

I am very concerned at your support for the Brussels Call, a series of initiatives which will endanger sex workers; push them into criminality; increase risk and is not supported by any research or sex workers’ organisation. Today the European Women’s Lobby released a statement which contained a number of untruths and stigmatizing statements with your name attached in support.

• Between 80 and 95% of persons in prostitution have suffered some form of violence before entering the system of prostitution (e.g.,rape, incest, paedophilia).[1]

• 62% of women in prostitution report having been raped.[2]

• 9 out of 10 women in prostitution would like to exit the system of prostitution but feel unable to do so.[3]

• 68% of women in prostitution meet the criteria for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder in the same range as victims of torture undergoing treatment.[4]

• According to Interpol, a pimp earns 110 000 euros per year per prostituted person.

• Nevada, where procuring is decriminalised, sees the highest rates of rape compared to all US states.[5]

[1] Melissa Farley et al., ‘Prostitution in five countries: violence and post traumatic stress disorder’, Feminism and Psychology, 8, 1998.

[2] Melissa Farley et al., ‘Prostitution in five countries: violence and post traumatic stress disorder’, Feminism and Psychology, 8, 1998.

[3] UK Home Office, Paying the price, 2004

[4] Melissa Farley et al., “Prostitution in five countries: violence and post traumatic stress disorder”, Feminism and Psychology, 8, 1998

[5]http://www.prostitutionetsociete.fr/politiques-publiques/legislations-nationales/nevada-les-bordels-exemplaires-d.

Not a single one of these statements is supported by peer reviewed and accepted research. Melissa Farley has been discredited and has been disallowed from giving expert evidence in Canada and New Zealand. Academics in New Zealand filed a complaint against her, so problematic are her methods and conclusions. 

The statistic attributed to the UK parliament is in fact not found anywhere in that report, which indicates a lack of knowledge on this topic the Europeans Women’s lobby has.

You also put your name to the statement “Prostitution is violence against women” which denies the human rights of a sex worker to consent to sex, as well as making it more difficult for an oppressed and marginalized group to access support services. If your job is defined as violence it is very difficult to get help when you are actually on the receiving end of violence. This reached its apotheosis with the murder of a sex worker by her abusive ex partner in Sweden. 

The Pro Sentret report in Norway showed that criminalisation of clients leads to increased risks, rapes, violence, less time for screening, and lower condom usage. Economists have shown that it leads to lower prices, and sex workers being forced into changing their behaviour, with less time for risk management. That you support this is worrying in the extreme, and indicates little knowledge of, or concern for, the lives of sex workers.

The statement also claims that trafficking and sex work has decreased since criminalisation was introduced in Sweden. This is a complete fabrication which even the Swedish government does not claim. There are no pre-criminalisation statistics, and no evidence sex work has decreased. The lives of sex workers have become more difficult, which is seen as a victory by those who oppose sex work for religious/political/moral reasons. A 2011 study explains why a decrease cannot be claimed.

If you do genuinely care about sex workers, rather than supporting a campaign that will endanger them, I ask that you put your voice behind decriminalization on the New Zealand model. More information can be found out about their successful harm reduction and empowering of sex workers here.

To speak for sex workers instead of listening to them means you are ignoring the voices of an oppressed group, I hope this letter makes you reconsider and that you will contact sex workers groups in your country to learn more about what they want.

С уважение, 
Б. Герасимов