Meet Chris Atchison
Chris is a research associate at the University of Victoria in British Columbia, Canada.
Special interest: Johns.
Chris regards himself as an expert in this area (elephant in the room) and puts himself forward as such to the media and policy makers.
Chris’ goal is to create a community identity for johns to convince the public that they are a richly diverse yet impossible-to-define tapestry of nice complex gentlemen. A community that absolutely MUST be consulted about prostitution law and policy.
To misrepresent johns as predators is to punish good men, and to criminalize those men means that WOMEN WILL DIE.
Is that what you want?
The Justice Committee hearing – Canada
On 9 July 2014, Chris appeared before the Justice Committee examining Bill C-36, to present evidence that johns are nice and that context kills women. He drew from his two studies: Johns’ Voice and the Sex Safety Security project
Chris’ opening statement was [paraphrased]:
“I would like to make it clear that I do not represent any individual, group or organisation. I am here to discuss my empirical research. I have conducted two of the biggest pieces of research of those involved in the buying of consensual adult services.”
In fact, Chris is a ‘well known member of the sex buying community’. In that he arranges ‘Pooner Meetings’, strategizes with the johns, and calls them to action.
Chris is a member of Canadian prostitution forums MERB (Montreal Escort Review Boards), PERB (Pacific and Prairie Escort Review Boards) and TERB (Toronto Escort Review Boards).
Some of his usernames are: johnsvoice sexsafesecure sexsafetysecurity
This meeting took place on 29 April 2013 at SFU Harbor Center, in downtown Vancouver.
More interesting forum chat from Chris:
Johns’ Voice and Sex Safety Security Project – Victimization of Men
Chris’ credentials are two studies called Johns’ Voice and the Sex Safety Security project. In these studies, using a questionnaire, Chris asks 2000+ men who use women in prostitution to indicate whether they consider themselves to be exploitative abusers. Around 2000+ men said ‘nope’.
Just to be sure, Chris personally selects another 50-ish fine patrons to
have a sympathetic man-to-man chat with interview. He finds that they also think highly of themselves. You can read the report here.
Once you get accustomed to the neutralized language obscuring who’s doing what to whom in prostitution in his studies (commercial sex partner, people involved in transactional sex etc), Chris’ findings are remarkable.
Not only do men self-report that they are not rapists or misogynists, but they are frequently the victimized party in prostitution. They are ‘economically victimized’ which in john terms means – they do not always get what they paid for.
He reveals: ‘When victimization was experienced it most often (42.9% or n=365) took the form of not receiving services paid for’ Chris doesn’t explain why he considers the term victimization to be appropriate. Especially considering the privileged demographic of his respondents:
‘The men are well-educated with over one-third indicating that they have completed university education at varying levels. Most of them are gainfully employed in a variety of different occupations and earning, on average, more than $60,000 per annum. Like their interview counterparts, the majority of the questionnaire respondents could be classified as ‘experienced’ sex-buyers, with most participants indicating that they had paid for sex 100 times in their life. Overall, the demographic background of both the questionnaire and interview sample could best be described as reflective of the class, ethnic, cultural and political majority in Canada (i.e., middle class, Caucasian, heterosexual and male).’ – p.37 Johns’ Voice Report
Presumably Chris feels that their wealth and status will cast men who hobby in a favorable light. They’re just your average wealthy educated entitled guy (like Chris).
Still, Chris wants us to take male victimization seriously and not diminish these self -reports:
‘It is apparent that victimization is a two-way street, and it will likely continue to be as long as we force the people buying and selling sex to do so within the context of an underground economy. There is good reason to believe that understanding these contexts will not only help reduce the victimization experienced by sex buyers, but it will help us understand and reduce the victimization reported by sex workers’ p.34 Johns’ Voice Report
So, if violence exists at all in prostitution – something Chris considers to be entirely dubious, then we all know it is the fault of: contexts; stigma; moralists; feminists (see moralists); legislation; the government; law enforcement, bad luck, and…a tiny minority of wicked rapists masquerading as johns (i.e. they never intended to pay) who will go into predatory overdrive if you don’t stop your moral panic and walk away.
In pretending that men and the women they prostitute are equally positioned and at equal risk of exploitation, Chris hopes to generate a kind of societal Stockholm syndrome. You cannot challenge HIM, without harming HER. Unless you want WOMEN TO DIE.
Why do you want women to die?
What Chris is really getting at, is that when prostitution is regulated, women are better controlled. When women are more easily controlled and men get to hobby in comfort, men will be happier and less compelled to be violent.
For example; Let’s say a man client orders DFK (deep french kiss), FS (full sex), BBBJ (bareback blowjob – no condom) and CIM (cum in mouth) from the menu at his chosen stable establishment, and the woman service provider takes his $150 but in the end refuses CIM – that man is being economically victimized.
Never mind if he’s a wealthy businessman indulging his ‘hobby’ while his wife is out of town and his ‘provider’ is tired, has kids to feed, barely speaks English or knew she couldn’t fight the urge to vomit if she let him DT CIMWS (deepthroat cum in mouth with swallow).
If properly regulated and rules of commerce apply, that poor oppressed patron would get his CIM, or receive a satisfactory alternative for his hard-earned dollars and be properly compensated with a discount or a freebie on the house. No violence necessary to get his money’s worth or his money back. Not only that, she would have to pay tax on his donation as is right and proper for someone receiving HIS cash.
Chris wants regulation, because it will benefit men, and the john ‘community’. Chris Atchison is trying to build a political platform for misogynists and rapists.
Just research, Chris?
*Susan Davis is a pro-prostitution lobbyist who promotes johns rights and acts as an advocate for them with media police and local authorities. Erslist.com, a prostitution listings website, pay her monthly for her work. She works hard to promote Chris and his message that johns are victimized in prostitution and that men getting ripped-off – economic exploitation! – is a real issue.
The man thanking her at the bottom of this page is Hatrick, he is John #8 in the Invisible Men Project Canada. His comment to Susi was posted prior to the tabling of Bill C-36, when he thought his hobbying would be decriminalized and even more prolific.