Neither of those drugs makes you pock-marked or thin, nor is a drug habit crippling. Nor does it require you to sell your body. All of those things become true only if addicts have the misfortune to live in a society which insists on prohibiting those drugs

But that's the sales pitch to try to scare you into not taking them. But your point is valid that drug prohibition is the cause of the vulnerability of these woemn. As Deborah Orr goes on to point out in the article Migeru highlighted;-

The irony is that those who run escort services or saunas are no more enamoured of drug-addicted employees than are the managers of insurance offices. Addicted, chaotic, mentally-ill, care-leaving girls or abused women - even older, less attractive, or less personable women - find it hard to get work in other, less dangerous, parts of the sex industry, for much the same reason as they can't get work anywhere else. They're just not very employable. They're not good material for entrepreneurial self-employment either.

So none of the models quoted will work for these women.They are made vulnearble by their addiction, an addiction which society blames them for.

Unfortunately, just as street prostitution is stubbornly seen as a feckless choice rather than a rock-bottom consequence of having no perceived choice at all, heroin abuse is viewed as a moral dereliction rather than an addictive illness.

but the solution to making these women less vulnearble would require a politically-unacceptable reformation of Britain's (and probably the global) approach to drugs.


keep to the Fen Causeway