A Salvation Army campaign against human trafficking that depicts prostitutes as slaves and victims of brutal violence isn't sitting well with some people here in Lotusland.
The Sally Ann recently launched a campaign called “Truth Isn’t Sexy” with graphic images of women being throttled or having their heads bashed against a sidewalk. The images can be seen around Metro Vancouver on billboards, in public washrooms and on transit shelters.
The Vancouver Sun recently published this article quoting a
Hello? What is misleading or sensational about the notion that prostitution is debasing to women? However, vested interests would like us to think it's a viable career choice ... vested interests who profit from debased and demoralized women trapped in the lifestyle.
Of course, those interests would have us believe that most "sex trade workers" do it by choice. According to this article in Macleans magazine, a spokeswoman for another Vancouver-based "prostitution advocacy group" called FIRST said that that "sex trade workers have been hurt by the campaign" and wants the Salvation Army to "draw a greater distinction between victims of trafficking and those who choose to work in the sex trade."
Right. The Salvation Army does a terrible disservice to women by trying to prevent them from making a "career choice" in which they are very likely to end up in a "work" situation like this ... one highly doubtful that anyone would choose willingly.
You'd think that newspapers and magazines might actually run those Salvation Army ads for free as a public service. But on second thought, that's pretty naive. Business is bad for publishers these days. Very bad. Sex sells, and so does controversy ... so it would be out of the question to pass up the opportunity to publish articles containing both components. What could fit the bill better than pitting good people trying to rescue victimized women from the street against self-appointed "representatives" of prostitutes saying they object to the imagery ... and the notion that prostitution is not a desirable career choice for women?
Who has more to lose when women leave the streets, or stay away from them, than pimps and human traffickers... the ultimate capitalist exploiters?
So what are the chances they'd consider bankrolling a few "prostitution advocacy groups" and offering a nice incentive to a few well-spoken "sex trade workers" to be their spokeswomen?
I'd say fair to middling. Because, if you were a sex-trade worker, wouldn't you rather make money by talking to reporter than servicing a creepy john? And if you were a pimp or human trafficker, wouldn't you be willing to make that small investment to protect the revenues that provide your nice cushy lifestyle?
As for the newspapers and magazines, they probably can't afford to pay reporters
So all we can do in the meantime is draw our own conclusions.