6 Irish Children found among those trafficked for sex trade : (

I saw a few underage prostitutes in Phnom Penh last week with their 60yr old boyfriends.. Fuking hate it.

eviltwin

Missing Irish children are missed sooner. Someone somewhere will notice little Johnny or Mary has been missing school. If they are pre school age a child that is not brought in for his or her health checks will be noticed.

A child brought in today from overseas doesn't have that. They are unrecorded.

When its an Irish child that goes missing it shows a failing of an entire system. I think that why its being flagged in the press the way it is. Its like the stats posted on kids missing from HSE care, you have to ask yourself "how could this happen"

You are seeing racism Micropig where none exists.

prinz

micropig wrote: »

Ah, I see, I'll presume it's just good old fashioned racism then. No history of child abuse in Ireland.

Did you actually read the article you linked to on the numbers of children missing in Ireland or was it just the headline that attracted you? Here's your kids missing from state care... from your own link

"The vast majority - and I can't give a specific figure - of those 114 children are either of African or Asian origin," said Mr O'Mahoney

So yes, when one hears of children being recovered in an operation like this it's not a case of "good old fashioned racism" at all to consider the ethnic origin of those involved.

micropig

eviltwin wrote: »

A child brought in today from overseas doesn't have that. They are unrecorded.

Yes, that does happen but these children were Irish citizens

Unrecorded, yet Irish citizens....How does that work?

prinz wrote: »

Did you actually read the article you linked to on the numbers of children missing in Ireland or was it just the headline that attracted you? Here's your kids missing from state care... from your own link

So yes, when one hears of children being recovered in an operation like this it's not a case of "good old fashioned racism" at all to consider the ethnic origin of those involved.

It's good old fashioned racism to presume they are all foreign..we miss the peado's under our noses.

Where in the original article does it state that these 6 children where foreign?

Delancey

micropig wrote: »

Where in the original article does it state that these 6 children where foreign?

Nowhere , but it should be recognised that the article does not define '' Irish Children '' either , given the article relies to a large extent on what the Ruhama group say then I would be deeply skeptical.

I have little doubt these children are from non-national parents.

curlzy

Delancey wrote: »

Nowhere , but it should be recognised that the article does not define '' Irish Children '' either , given the article relies to a large extent on what the Ruhama group say then I would be deeply skeptical.

I have little doubt these children are from non-national parents.

Not trying be argumentative but you seem to have some kind of insider knowledge here. Do you have information we don't have, you must really, in order to be "deeply skeptical" of what the Ruhama group says? Also what reason do you have to have "little doubt these children are from non-national parents". I'm just wondering if you have some info we don't have? If not, what are you basing the post above on?

eviltwin

micropig wrote: »

Yes, that does happen but these children were Irish citizens

Unrecorded, yet Irish citizens....How does that work?


It's good old fashioned racism to presume they are all foreign..we miss the peado's under our noses.

Where in the original article does it state that these 6 children where foreign?

Dear god the article is about children being used as sex toys for sick fecks and all you seem to be able to dwell on is the wording of the headline :eek:

prinz

micropig wrote: »

Where in the original article does it state that these 6 children where foreign?

Good old fashioned racism to confuse children of immigrants with foreigners buddy. One can be a child of an immigrant and be as Irish as Paddy McIreland up the road.

flanders1979 wrote: »

I presume they are the children of immigrants?

micropig

eviltwin wrote: »

Dear god the article is about children being used as sex toys for sick fecks and all you seem to be able to dwell on is the wording of the headline :eek:

I never mention the wording of the headline


Irish citizens are Irish children


To dismiss them as non-citizens because their parents are foreign is ignorant


To presume all people doing this are foreign is also ignorant



Whether foreign or not, child abuse exists in Ireland. Perpetrated by Irish people on Irish Children.


The article states 'Thirteen were minors and seven of those - including the six Irish youngsters - had been forced in to the sex trade.'


Why presume they are anything but Irish?


Sure, weren't the priests all Irish boys, raised by Irish mammies.

It wasn't confined to them though, plenty of Irish examples to choose from where Irish children have been passed around Irish adults...


Do you think this only happened years ago, and not any more?


@prinz: I'm just presuming good old fashioned racism is behind it, just like it is been presumed their parents are immigrants.

Chuck Stone

Min wrote: »

Where prostitution islegal and regulated there is still the problem of people trafficked into the sex industry.

Two entirely different issues you're conflating there. When something is pushed underground then it will attract unsavoury types.

Legalise and regulate.

We need to prosecute the users of prostitutes and to have the user's name published in national newspapers.

You will never ever be able to stop the selling of sex. People have been at it for thousands of years. Two consensual adults should be allowed to enter into an agreement even if it involves something you personally disapprove of.

Min wrote: »

But a lot of people involved in prostitution are not there because they want to be.

And a lot are there because they make a rational decision to be. Btw people doing jobs they don't exactly like is a fact of life - why you want to make the sex trade a special case is to do with your own personal feelings towards it.

Pushing the sex trade underground and making criminals out of consenting adults only contributes to the problem.

People who force others into the sex trade should face harsh sentences especially when it involves minors.

Consenting adults entering into a mutual agreement that involves sex?

How about you stay out of their business?

prinz

micropig wrote: »

To dismiss them as non-citizens because their parents are foreign is ignorant..

I don't think anyone has dismissed them as non-citizens. Certainly not the original post you tok issue with.

micropig wrote: »

To presume all people doing this are foreign is also ignorant

Who did that? Perhaps you should focus your argument on things that are actually being said instead of inventing new ones. Irish children have been abused. Irish people have abused children. Nobody has denied any of that.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Two entirely different issues you're conflating there. When something is pushed underground then it will attract unsavoury types. Legalise and regulate.

Unsavoury types are attracted to any industry where money is to be made, especially a lot of quick cash for very little work. Doesn't matter if it is over- or underground. Again there is plenty of unsavoury types involving themselves in the sex trade in countries which try to regulate it.

Chuck Stone

prinz wrote: »

Unsavoury types are attracted to any industry where money is to be made, especially a lot of quick cash for very little work.

Yep. Banking and property development speculation springs to mind.

Doesn't matter if it is over- or underground.

There is evidence in this thread of how it does matter. That guy who ran a brothel and went to the cops to tell them that men were looking for children for sex is a perfect example.

prinz

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Yep. Banking and property development speculation springs to mind.

..and counterfeit cigarettes, fuel laundering etc, but wait, flogging the fags and diesel is regulated and legal? Why on earth does they attract unsavoury types :eek:

Chuck Stone wrote: »

There is evidence in this thread of how it does matter.....

One criminal (who at least had some morals granted and fair play to the guy for coming forward) who informed on another... but somehow that negates the material on Amsterdam that was linked to earlier?

Chuck Stone

prinz wrote: »

..and counterfeit cigarettes,

High taxes and borders. The more the state lumps taxes on stuff the further and further away it gets from a price that reflects its real value.

fuel laundering etc, but wait, flogging the fags and diesel is regulated and legal?

Again, high taxes distort the price and invite people in to undercut the inflated price. People are highly motivated by price. If the state taxes the **** out of something and you can get it for half the price you will be tempted to go for the saving. Prices motivate people - that fact (and wanting revenue) is the very reason that taxes of cigs are high.

Why on earth does they attract unsavoury types :eek:

As you have said people will try to make a quick buck.

but somehow that negates the material on Amsterdam that was linked to earlier?

I'll take a proper look at the study although I don't think it will change the underlying principle that people should not foist their values and try to criminalise the behaviour consenting adults.

prinz

Chuck Stone wrote: »

High taxes and borders. The more the state lumps taxes on stuff the further and further away it gets from a price that reflects its real value..

..and what is the value of using somebody for sex? €5? €50? Surely if it's legalised and regulated then it should also be taxed?

Delancey

curlzy wrote: »

Not trying be argumentative but you seem to have some kind of insider knowledge here. Do you have information we don't have, you must really, in order to be "deeply skeptical" of what the Ruhama group says? Also what reason do you have to have "little doubt these children are from non-national parents". I'm just wondering if you have some info we don't have? If not, what are you basing the post above on?

To be brutally blunt - if these Irish children were of the red-haired and pale skinned variety you can be sure we would have heard much more about it - simple as that.
Regarding Ruhama - they launched an anti-trafficking iniative a few years ago with state-funding despite at the time there was not a single recorded case of sex trafficking into Ireland.
Trafficking goes on and Ruhama always say it is related to the sex industry when in fact most people trafficked in are working at slave labour conditions in the fast food industry .
Ruhama exagerrate the extent of sex trafficking , I believe they wish to ' invent ' a problem and thus secure state funding , as far as I'm concerned they are the Legion of Mary under a new name.

Sex trafficking goes on but like drink spiking its prevalence is greatly exaggerated.
How many cases have been confirmed by the authorities ? A handful is all.

Chuck Stone

prinz wrote: »

..and what is the value of using somebody for sex? €5? €50?

Wouldn't have a bull's notion. Not something I'd engage in myself.

Surely if it's legalised and regulated then it should also be taxed?

Absolutely. I would also go as far as to suggest that any money the state takes in from it would be ring-fenced and used to provide services for people who are involved in the industry (particularly people who were coerced).

prinz

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Absolutely. I would also go as far as to suggest that any money the state takes in from it would be ring-fenced and used to provide services for people who are involved in the industry (particularly people who were coerced).

..and wherever you have taxes you have distance from real value as you said yourself, and wherever price doesn't reflect real value you have unsavoury types getting involved and you'll get..

People are highly motivated by price. If the state taxes the **** out of something and you can get it for half the price you will be tempted to go for the saving. Prices motivate people..

So people will be tempted to go for the cheaper option, or in other words the unregulated brothels more than likely run by scum pimps and staffed by the people they terrorise.

Chuck Stone

prinz wrote: »

..and wherever you have taxes you have distance from real value as you said yourself, and wherever price doesn't reflect real value you have unsavoury types getting involved and you'll get..

I guess it's all about balance - if you tax something to death a black market will inevitably emerge. I'm sure people working in the sex trade would much rather work in a place that had its shit in order.

So people will be tempted to go for the cheaper option, or in other words the unregulated brothels

Again, I guess it comes down to balance. Punitive taxation and regulation would probably provide oxygen to underground 'service' provision.

more than likely run by scum pimps and staffed by the people they terrorise.

Are pimps and staff always scum and do they always terrorise? Also, if the industry is populated by scum then decriminalising it and providing services to possible victims is surely a better way of reducing the harm than keeping it underground.

prinz

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Are pimps and staff always scum and do they always terrorise?

Are pimps always scum? As far as I'm concerned yes. Staff no, I never said that.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Also, if the industry is populated by scum then decriminalising it and providing services to possible victims is surely a better way of reducing the harm than keeping it underground.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7769199.stm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2007/sep/23/travelnews.amsterdam

Did it reduce the harm in Amsterdam, debatable..

Chuck Stone

prinz wrote: »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2007/sep/23/travelnews.amsterdam

Did it reduce the harm in Amsterdam, debatable..

From that very article.

Women have been standing in the windows around this area for years but only since 2000 did the shops become legally licensed. When Majoor worked there from 1985 to 1990, the 'rooms were more dirty, with cockroaches' and girls as young as 16 were joining the business. Now, she argued, that was not possible. Legalisation had made the city safer for prostitutes, who now had to prove that they were 18 or over.

She is worried that a shortage of windows will push woman away from the safe, monitored areas. The battle over the spaces that are left could attract more criminals to the area, she said.

Prostitution, she added, existed in every city, in every country, in every part of the world. All that was different here was that it took place in public - and that made the women less open to exploitation and abuse.

That's from a woman who has lived the experience.

I think the fact that Amsterdam has become an 'island of permissiveness' will attract unsavoury tourism and crime will concentrate there.

That's why I'd be a little sceptical about unilateral moves to decriminalise drugs and prostitution. If it was decriminalised Europe wide then perhaps places like Amsterdam would be less of a draw for the scummy types.

Delancey

It is fear of a liberalising of the laws relating to sex for sale that has Ruhama telling us that every sex worker is a trafficked slave.
The Legion of Mary was as the name suggests a strongly Catholic organisation that was set up essentially to stamp out prostitution and ' rescue ' the women who worked as prostitutes ( many ended up in Magdalen laundries btw ) .

As our society continues its inexorable movement towards becoming secular the Legion of Mary has rebranded itself and is called Ruhama and it uses scare stories of widespread sex trafficking to oppose any legislative changes.

prinz

Chuck Stone wrote: »

From that very article.

You'll also notice references to crime, money laundering and from the same woman..

'They really have to do something about the pimps - and a pimp is never an owner of a brothel.'

I suppose when you have millionaire property magnates owning the brothels you can get rid of cockroaches. But I suppose as long as you have 18 year olds from Woking to gawk at women as if they were trophies or sausages in a butchers window it's all good.

eviltwin

Delancey wrote: »

It is fear of a liberalising of the laws relating to sex for sale that has Ruhama telling us that every sex worker is a trafficked slave.
The Legion of Mary was as the name suggests a strongly Catholic organisation that was set up essentially to stamp out prostitution and ' rescue ' the women who worked as prostitutes ( many ended up in Magdalen laundries btw ) .

As our society continues its inexorable movement towards becoming secular the Legion of Mary has rebranded itself and is called Ruhama and it uses scare stories of widespread sex trafficking to oppose any legislative changes.

Total bs....I was in the Legion for years as was my mother for years before me. working for or with prostitutes was never part of it.

Chuck Stone

Delancey wrote: »

It is fear of a liberalising of the laws relating to sex for sale that has Ruhama telling us that every sex worker is a trafficked slave.

They'd be better off trying to reduce the harm than telling people how to live their lives.

Prostitution is a by-product of a free society imho. The people who would like to have a theocratic style dictatorship where there were no behaviour 'crimes' should probably take a look at Saudi Arabia as a model of how to head towards achieving it. Even though the reprehensible scum who run such regimes probably fly their prostitutes in on private jets.

Fuck that shit.

prinz

eviltwin wrote: »

Total bs....I was in the Legion for years as was my mother for years before me. working for or with prostitutes was never part of it.

If the poster bothered to do a 20 second google he'd see that it has no connection to the Legion of Mary.

Chuck Stone

prinz wrote: »

You'll also notice references to crime, money laundering and from the same woman..

I reckon that's because Amsterdam attracts unsavoury types in numbers it wouldn't otherwise if the countries they travelled from were less authoritarian.

I suppose when you have millionaire property magnates owning the brothels you can get rid of cockroaches. But I suppose as long as you have 18 year olds from Woking to gawk at women as if they were trophies or sausages in a butchers window it's all good.

Nobody is trying to make the argument that the sex trade is a 'good' thing. Smoking isn't good, over-eating isn't good, drinking too much beer isn't good yet we don't make criminals of people for doing it or for those who sell those goods.

prinz

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Nobody is trying to make the argument that the sex trade is a 'good' thing. Smoking isn't good, over-eating isn't good, drinking too much beer isn't good yet we don't make criminals of people for doing it or for those who sell those goods.

..and where do we end up? Legalising everything as long as it's "consenting" adults? We don't criminalise smokers, but we do spend an awful lot of time and effort trying to get people to stop with various restrictions, bans, ad campaigns etc.

Chuck Stone

prinz wrote: »

..and where do we end up? Legalising everything as long as it's "consenting" adults?

Legalising does not mean free-for-all. Look at cigarettes - they are legal but their sale and use is heavily regulated and taxed. It's probably harder for <18's to get cigarettes and alcohol than illegal drugs at this stage.

We don't criminalise smokers, but we do spend an awful lot of time and effort trying to get people to stop with various restrictions, bans, ad campaigns etc.

Yep, and it works - smoking in the west has been on a steady decline (from memory).

prinz

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Yep, and it works - smoking in the west has been on a steady decline (from memory).

So legalise it....and then slowly ban it and eradicate it again.