Or at least, that’s how I’m interpreting Dr Brooke Magnanti’s post “Radfems, racism and the problem with pimps.”
I’m not sure what I was expecting when I ventured onto that blog post, but it certainly wasn’t a defense of pimps—or should I call them procurers, madams, panderers et al?
Apparently radfems should not assume that women don’t “choose” to prostitute themselves, and/or participate in sex work. But we should extend this line of thought to the pimps; Magnanti says:
Do you think [the pimp’s] choice of work isn’t somehow constrained by society too? That he wouldn’t rather be earning money some other way? Because anyone with any sense can surely suss out that a lot of activities, both legal and illegal, would be far more profit and far less hassle than running girls.
Abusing women and girls: not a real choice.
Being abused: free will!
She then goes on to talk about how these pimps don’t make much money. Because 50% of 10 pounds is only 5 pounds. How is this relevant? Should we be applauding the pimps for being industrious? For pushing “their” women to perform acts they can charge more for? For procuring more women to abuse?
I just. don’t. get. it. It’s so flabbergasting. Also: I noticed that she tagged her post with “terf” so I guess this is a term that’s on the blogosphere now? Excuse me while I go bang my head against a wall.
* I am not being intentionally obtuse in my continued use of the word ‘pimp’; rather, I don’t believe a privileged white liberal feminist is the authority on whether the term is racist. If WOC feel this word is racist I will reconsider my use of it.