I was perusing my local news website This is Gloucestershire when I come across the headline
Harrie’s hoping to be crowned Miss Teen Queen.

STARDOM beckons for teenager Harrie Smith who could become Britain’s next top teen beauty.

After being spotted at the Clothes Show, Harrie, of Longlevens, is hoping to make it through to the final round of the UK’s Teen Queen 2010.

The 15-year-old was walking around the Clothes Show stalls at the Birmingham NEC when she was discovered. This is Gloucestershire.

You can Google the internet and find every local newspaper full of this crap, Ashley Hughes 14 from Halesowen, Leah Jones 13 & Nicola Maynard 14 from Rugby, Bryony Gibbons 15 from Exeter, Jessica Forster 15 from Lancashire, Ellie Jones 13 & Helen Major 18 from Worcester, and on and on it goes – not one local newspaper stopping to think for a moment.

Ellie Jones 13-years-old from Worcester and Jessica Forster 15-years-old from Lancashire

In fact Miss Teen Queen U.K. is a “Hot or Not”-style online beauty pageant which some are criticizing for its Lolita-esque practices. The teen girls’ bra sizes are posted up on the pageant site along with their shoe and dress sizes, plus some pictures that often look straight out of a Maxim photo shoot. Jessica Wakeman, The Frisky.

Rebecca Ryan 15-years-old

Young women are posed in sexy, provocative pictures, with most of the girls giving “come hither” stares and showing off their bodies, many of the underage girls are bent slightly forward, showing off their cleavage. There are also several photographs of 14 and 15 year-old girls lying down with their legs in the air.

…

Lina Perrini, director of the pageant, stands by her organization and says there’s nothing wrong with the pictures on the site: “As for whether or not I’m encouraging girls to grow up too quickly, well, unfortunately girls of 13 are thinking about their looks and figures regardless of whether they enter this competition. At their age, I was reading Bunty and playing with my toys. But I know from research we’ve done that in the UK today, girls of that age are already drinking alcohol and reading OK! Magazine.” So that makes it okay to post kiddie-porn esque pictures of them in the name of “modelling”? Are you fucking serious? Maybe instead of saying, “Well, screw it, they’re already drinking alcohol, let’s have them pose with their legs in the air,” maybe you should start a pageant that encourages young women to have respect for their bodies and provide them with a positive alternative to OK Magazine and getting wasted after school. God forbid we ever encourage young girls to do anything else but shut up and look sexy. Hortense, Jezebel.

And it was only the other day I was listening to radio reports on how young children are over exposed to sexual imagery? Miss Teen Queen UK not only exposes children to inappropriate sexual imagery it encourages their active participation.

The age of the child on the front page of Teen Queen Website leaves you in no doubt what to expect

New powers to control lap-dancing clubs are being given to councils in England and Wales, the Home Office has said.

Current licensing laws put clubs in the same category as pubs and cafes and councils can object only on the grounds of crime, nuisance or public safety.

From April, clubs will be classed as sex establishments and residents will be able to oppose venues for being “inappropriate” to the area.

Existing clubs will have 12 months to apply for a licence or face closure.

…

But lap dancing club owners said a change in the law would lead to job losses and lower investment in a £2.1bn industry. Source: The BBC.

Job losses and lower investment in sexist exploitation is a problem how exactly?

You’d expect The Guardian’s readers to be more enlightened that most other newspapers, just how wrong you can be these letters where published in Fridays paper in response to Julie Bindel’s article Why men use prostitutes.

All men pay for sex, the only difference, the only difference is whether the payment is direct or indirect. Your article deals with direct payment – equivalent to rent, whereas marriage is more like a mortgage. Just think how many wives give hubby “a bit” to obtain holidays, outfits, gifts, etc. Most women have a touch of the prostitute about them. Unpalatable but true. Jim.

How would you prevent prostitution? I doubt you could, and why would you want to? Why not legalise and regulate it? That would be a far more effective way to prevent participants from being exploited than driving the industry deeper underground. And although most men would prefer their sexuality fulfilled in the context of a relationship, the reality is that many relationships don’t fulfil either partner’s sexual needs. One might conclude that a good prostitute is by far the cheapest way to sexual fulfilment, compared to marriage. Peter.

I see little difference between spending hundreds wining and dining a woman for sex, and paying a prostitute, the transaction is very clear, Anonymous.

If a man wishes to get laid he has three options – paying her, persuading her, forcing her. The last is clearly unacceptable. But which is better – persuade a woman to sleep with you, telling her whatever it takes, then send her home disillusioned – or pay her, with no deceit involved? Anonymous.

I pay for sex for the simple reason that women have rejected me all my life. Find me a woman who does not reject me and I will immediately desist from this behaviour that I do not necessarily entirely want to engage in. Anonymous.

You know I avoid papers like the Daily Mail so I don’t have to read such rubbish – how many Guardian readers support these views? Was the papers postbag bursting with letters expressing these views or has the editor published these letters to provoke a reaction? I wonder how many men hold these disgusting views – it would appear too many.

Hundreds of people have attended a wedding in central Somalia between a man who says he is 112 years old, and his teenage wife.

Ahmed Muhamed Dore – who already has 18 children by five wives – said he would like to have more with his new wife, Safia Abdulleh, who is 17 years old.

“Today God helped me realise my dream,” Mr Dore said, after the wedding in the region of Galguduud.

The bride’s family said she was “happy with her new husband”.

Mr Dore said he and his bride – who is young enough to be his great-great-grand-daughter – were from the same village in Somalia and that he had waited for her to grow up to propose.

“I didn’t force her, but used my experience to convince her of my love; and then we agreed to marry,” the groom said. BBC.

As is far to common the world over men debase the dignity and social standing of women – what does it say about the worth of girls in Somalia when a man who already has five wives can marry another girl – let alone one of 17 when he claims to be 112 – and no I don’t accept the argument that I’m applying Western values where they have no right to be applied – this is just one albeit extreme example of men abusing young girls in far to many countries – it is wrong.

Global Gender Gap Index

The World Economic Forum’s Global Gender Gap Report for 2009 is gloomy as ever

Whilst health and education aren’t problematic as far as gender bias goes – although we aren’t considering the quality of education – so they’re will still be gender issues – what is striking is there’s almost a complete shut-out of women participating in politics – and it’s no good thinking it isn’t as bad if you just consider western style democracies – because whilst better it’s still appalling – the best placed country is Iceland at just under 60% – whilst Western Europe fails to score half that.

Regional Performance on the Political Empowerment Index

Not very good is it?

After reading Prostitution and trafficking – the anatomy of a moral panic by Nick Davis which opens by suggesting that trafficking is nothing more than a tide of misinformation similar to Saddam Hussein’s weapons! I thought Davis’ article is poorly researched and selective – not least his use of conviction statistics, taking his line then if we used police conviction rates for rape which are a dismal 6.5% – then rape doesn’t happen it’s but a fantasy. Further more Davis’ attitude to prostitution is that it’s wholly voluntary – nothing could be further from the truth.

Rahila Gupta’s article Sex trafficking is no illusion explains why Davis’ article is mistaken.

An article on trafficking into the sex trade has been written by the investigative reporter Nick Davies, whose reputation will lend authority to it – although it is a hugely selective piece of reporting of the available research.

The article purports to show that so few women are trafficked into the sex trade that the policy, services and funding focus on it is completely misplaced. The debate on trafficking is bedevilled by the lack of credible data – but the parallels are not with the weapons of mass destruction case, as Davies suggests, which was ultimately verifiable, but with other subterranean issues such as domestic violence or rape. The widely accepted statistic that one in four women experience violence, for example, is based largely on anecdotal evidence and extrapolations from local surveys. It could be similarly taken apart by anyone who wanted to assert that the case was overblown, because ultimately the numbers are unknowable.

The piece opens with a clever piece of sophistry that suggests trafficking does not exist. Davies claims that “The UK’s biggest ever investigation of sex trafficking failed to find a single person who had forced anybody into prostitution” – which seems to suggest that prostitution is generally a voluntary activity, an argument developed in the rest of the piece. However, it is actually saying that it failed to find traffickers. I have interviewed police officers who say it is extremely difficult to use the trafficking laws to bring people to justice.

Peter Spindler, the police officer who headed Operation Paladin, a three-month investigation into unaccompanied children entering the country through Heathrow, has talked about the difficulties of obtaining convictions for trafficking. “We’ve got all the offences, but they are so complicated to prove. We have had a number of convictions for facilitation where organised criminals have been paid to bring children in. The problem with trafficking is that you’ve got to prove exploitation,” he says. In spite of these problems, we discover from a parliamentary answer from Alan Campbell in June that 267 people have been prosecuted under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which led to 109 convictions, a remarkably high percentage. This fact does not appear in Nick Davies’s article, despite his extensive research.

There are other notable absences: there is no mention of the report into trafficking by a home affairs committee, published in May, which gave an estimate of 5000 trafficked women and children in the UK, based on an aggregation of the figures provided by those working in this field. Nor does the article make a distinction between smuggling and trafficking. When Davies refers to the conviction of criminals for “transporting willing sex workers” he is talking of smuggling, where the smugglers and those smuggled in are equally guilty before the law.

On this basis, prostitutes were regularly criminalised and deported before trafficking legislation was brought in to safeguard women who had been coerced into the work. The European convention on action against trafficking in human beings, in its limited way, shifts the focus from criminalisation to the protection of women. It is self-serving and reckless for the sex workers’ lobby to argue against trafficking legislation simply because recognition of the scale of the problem undermines a central plank of their argument: that prostitution is freely chosen.

Davies quotes only those sex-worker groups who feel that their right to work as prostitutes is under attack from anti-trafficking initiatives. A recently formed group of ex-sex workers, Esso, believe that only 2% of women freely choose prostitution. Their leaflet declares that they are fighting, “for a world where females are not bought and sold like commodities; our orifices just another currency, our labour and lives and sexuality expendable”. Fiona Broadfoot, an ex-prostitute, who set up the
Exit project to help women in a similar situation, said they “couldn’t put one foot in front of another without taking £400 worth of crack”. Even outside the debate on trafficking, there has to be a much more nuanced approach to choice and compulsion. Many women are deliberately addicted by pimps so that they stay on the game in order to finance their habit, while others report that they cannot get through a working day unless they are drugged to their eyeballs.

The UK government’s actions are part of a concerted European attempt to tackle trafficking. If sex trafficking is a chimera, then not only the UK but the EU has been duped. To challenge the scale of the problem in the UK, you have to challenge the Europe-wide response. Women are often pushed around various parts of Europe. “Natasha”, a 17-year-old Russian girl I met, was taken to Brussels and made to work there before she was sold on to a trafficker in London. Her pimp was convicted and imprisoned for seven years, but only because she finally agreed to the harrowing experience of giving evidence against a man who had terrorised her. Women like her already face a “culture of disbelief” among immigration officials keen to reduce the number of women who get leave to remain in this country on the basis of their experiences. Articles such as this will only make things worse for them.

To get governments to part with resources needs a robust, evidence-based case. That is how the Poppy project for trafficked women got started: trafficked women were being deposited on their doorstep (because their parent organisation Eaves provides housing for other vulnerable women) and there was no expertise or funding to deal with them. There is a snide attempt to discredit Poppy by implying that their Home Office funding gives them a vested interest in inflating the figures. However, Poppy’s 25 bed spaces has recently been upgraded to 54, and they still have to turn women away.

Demolishing police figures does not prove that trafficking into the sex trade is so minuscule that it doesn’t matter. Come on Nick. You can do better than that. Rahila Gupta, The Guardian.

Marge Playboy Cover

PinkStinks writes

I imagine that for many people, on first glance, it’s all a bit of innocent fun. It’s only a cartoon after all. But start thinking about it and I’m filled with horror on many counts. Firstly, it’s Marge! She’s a hero. She’s funny, intelligent, different – an icon. And she is loved by children all over the world. Secondly, Playboy have said that the reason they want to feature Marge is because they want to attract more 20-somethings as readers. That’s readers of porn – in case we forget. Thirdly – it sanitises and legitimises porn. It makes it something which can creep unnoticed into the realms of popular culture – and into the consciousness of our children.

We don’t yet know what hideousness awaits us inside the magazine, but Playboy’s editorial director promises us “it’s very, very racy,”. He goes on to say: “She is a stunning example of the cartoon form.”

Innocent fun? I don’t feel like laughing. I feel like Marge has been robbed from us in the name of porn. Whipped away from under our noses. She is a cartoon character who actually inspires many young girls to dare to be different. She’s been given the treatment – she’s been sexed up – and turned into an object to be leered at. Isn’t this the pressure that girls are under from every angle every day of their lives: sex yourself up – it’s the only way to succeed. How on earth do I explain to my daughter what this is all about?

And it’s only a matter of time before they move on … to Lisa perhaps? Not so funny when you start thinking about it like that is it? PinkStinks.

But then copyright holder of the Simpsons is the Fox Broadcasting Company and owned by News International publisher of The Sun newspaper and its infamous page 3. I thought Simpson creator Matt Groening as left-wing or at least left-leaning – how wrong can you be – it seems he’s sold his soul to the Murdoch Empire.

Honesty in the fashion world is fantasy firstly we have Karl Lagerfeld:

Karl Lagerfeld, the eccentric German fashion designer, has waded into the debate about size-zero models by stating that people prefer to look at “skinny models”, and those who do not are “fat mummies”. Kate Connolly, The Guardian.

Then we have John Ribbe

The Hamburg fashion designer John Ribbe joined the debate, saying the row over underweight models had become hysterical. “It’s just as much a cliché as saying that all models take drugs and get drunk at sex orgies,” he said.

“Ninety per cent of them are quite normal, properly proportioned girls with less fat and more muscles who also eat pizzas and burgers.” Kate Connolly, The Guardian.

You have to wonder how much time Lagerfeld and Ribbe spend around young girls to have such a distorted view of women.

As a father of an eight-old-girl I’m doing my damndest into showing her that the catwalk models aren’t the epitomisation of womanhood.

There seems to be a lot of publicity regarding models that aren’t size zero lately

Model Hayley Morley caused shock waves when she walked for Mark Fast at London Fashion Week.

A stylist and casting director have left a London Fashion Week show over a decision to use average-sized models, a fashion boss says.

Amanda May, managing director for Canadian designer Mark Fast, said there were “creative differences with regards to the casting of those girls”.

Fast broke fashion convention by putting three size 12 to 14 models on the catwalk on Saturday.

“There was a team change and we’re glad we stuck to our vision,” said Ms May.

Ms May said stylist Daniela Agnelli and casting director Natalie Hubbard stepped in at the last minute to help out. BBC.

It isn’t just me is it – but isn’t size 12 quite health and normal?

Crystal Renn models a Jean-Paul Gaultier creation in 2005

Then my Sunday newspaper The Observer is full of pictures of Crystal Renn, who’s supposedly a plus-size model – but to be honest from the photos I can’t tell the difference between Renn and the normal stick insects you see in fashion shoots.

Now we have

Photo for Glamour which the magazine titled “seven total knockouts”

US Glamour Magazine (November issue) has made a commitment to showcasing body diversity in their magazine. They conclude the article: Let’s start that revolution right now. AnyBody.

Looking at these pictures I can’t see what’s really being achieved – these women are no more real life than those they are intended to replace – there’s no revolution here.

Guardian columnist Pamela Stephenson advised a man hooked on prostitutes to ask for sex tips on his next visit, Anderson defends her advice here, meanwhile Julie Bindel shows why Anderson is speaking nonsense.

In her reply to a man who wrote in asking for advice on his “addiction” to brothel sex, Pamela Stephenson Connolly failed to challenge any of his beliefs about prostitution or the sex industry. Her reply gave the impression that paying for sex is as unproblematic as buying a car or eating in a restaurant. She did not question his obvious belief that sex is a right – something that all men are automatically entitled to. She did not challenge him on his use of the word “hooked” as a justification for his continued use of women in prostitution, even though it looks to me very much like a choice rather than an addiction (he says he is “unlikely to give it up because [he has] great sex”).

Stephenson could have mentioned the grim realities of the sex trade. Instead, she portrayed it as a job like any other, when she wrote, “Many sex workers are very good at their job.” The reality is that more often than not the women would rather do any job than give blowjobs for money. Aside from a few exceptions, those involved in prostitution are treated as disposable, often coming from poor and disadvantaged backgrounds involving sexual abuse and social exclusion. Normalisation of prostitution results in a general view that men can’t help what they do and somehow “need” sex.

In giving such advice, Stephenson Connolly has betrayed the women in prostitution. I am not sure whether she would identify as a feminist but she surely realises that prostitution is both the cause and consequence of inequality between men and women. As long as men can buy women’s bodies we can never be equal. Instead she perpetuates the view of prostitution as a service industry by writing, “Some like to engage in a financial contract rather than negotiate via ‘dinner’ or ‘a movie’.”

Prostitutes are routinely seen as different from other women and Stephenson did not challenge this prejudice. A punter told me when I asked him why he paid for sex, rather than finding a girlfriend: “They are girls no one else wants to marry. So they work for sex. No one wants their wife to be a prostitute.” Charming.

Surely readers find the sex industry’s terrible treatment of its “workers” and the fact that women in brothels are marketed like any other merchandise abhorrent? Those of us who believe in social equality need to ask why so many of us defend prostitution and the rights of individual men to pay for sex.

One argument increasingly used by pimps and sex industry apologists is that a number of punters are disabled and unable to have sex the usual way. TLC Trust, a pro-sex industry campaigning organisation, is demanding one wheelchair-accessible brothel in every city “to meet the demand”, and that hospice wards should have provision for visiting sex workers. TLC even uses the example of wounded soldiers to call for an “NHS” approach to the sex industry. “It would be a sad injustice,” its website reads, “if service personnel such as soldiers badly wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan were banned from the help they receive from sex workers.” When one punter told me he believed, “If men could get it [prostitution] on the NHS, if they are disabled, it would prevent them from raping,” I found myself wondering how on earth men such as him came to believe that all men are potential rapists, when it was supposed to be radical feminists such as myself who propagate this? The majority of men do not pay for sex. And it’s offensive to people with disabilities to assume they cannot find a partner. Those who do pay for sex need to be educated about the harm it is causing the women, and society in general.

“Next time you’re with a sex worker, ask her for some pointers,” concludes Stephenson Connolly. Does she really think women having to service punters for a living concern themselves with teaching men how to give pleasure to women? They want to get it over with as quickly as possible and learn how to fake enjoyment rather than actually achieving it. Prostitution is a nasty business. Julie Bindel, The Guardian.