Those nuns who ran the Magdelene Laundries...

Mr. Loverman

There are a group of nuns called the Good Shepherd Sisters and Our Lady of Charity Sisters who used to run the Magdelene Laundries and now run an organisation called Ruhama.

For about 7 years they ran both the Magdelene Laundries and Ruhama at the same time.

For those of you who don't know, the Magdelene Laundries were forced labour camps for prostitutes. They have since been closed down but the nuns refuse to accept they did anything wrong and are yet to apologise.

Ruhama is their new organisation for dealing with prostitution. (Obviously they cannot use labour camps anymore as they are outlawed.)

They believe all prostitution is forced prostitution and all foreign prostitutes are trafficked prostitutes.

They run a campaign called www.turnofftheredlight.ie which is in direct conflict with the campaign run by sex workers in Ireland, www.turnoffthebluelight.ie

Due to their history we know these women are "misguided" and we know they unapologetically committed tens of thousands of criminal acts including kidnapping and forced labour, yet for some reason the media continues to publish their stories without asking for evidence or mentioning their history.

For example, RTE currently has this story as one of their headlines: http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0822/prostitution-support-group-sees-cases-increase.html

They claim they helped 200 trafficked women last year. They have made similar claims for many, many years. Yet, there have been hardly any arrests nevermind any convictions.

I understand the media have slow news days and will publish press releases as news, but please, these are the same people who ran the Magdelene Laundries.

The also receive over EUR 700,000 in funding from the government each year.

Does anyone else have a problem with this?

Gummy Panda

Didn't prime time expose the turn off the blue light website as being run by pimps. I remember they're tried going to address but it was a rundown building

Mr. Loverman

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Didn't prime time expose the turn off the blue light website as being run by pimps. I remember they're tried going to address but it was a rundown building

Is this the recent prime time programme which was created in conjunction with Ruhama?

Dyr

Are these the ones who want to make only the demand side of prostitution illegal?

Nice bunch alright

tigger123

Bambi wrote: »

Are these the ones who want to make only the demand side of prostitution illegal?

Nice bunch alright

What's wrong with making the demand side illegal? I think it's the way forward tbh, stop criminalising these women.

Gummy Panda

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Didn't prime time expose the turn off the blue light website as being run by pimps. I remember they're tried going to address but it was a rundown building

Is this the recent prime time programme which was created in conjunction with Ruhama?

So you are saying rte were lying about who owes the domain and that there is no office for that group?

Mr. Loverman

tigger123 wrote: »

What's wrong with making the demand side illegal? I think it's the way forward tbh, stop criminalising these women.

I understand we all have different opinions on how to best deal with prostitution.

If possible, can we keep this thread about how Ruhama are given free press and government funding and generally go unquestioned?

Dyr

tigger123 wrote: »

What's wrong with making the demand side illegal? I think it's the way forward tbh, stop criminalising these women.

Pretty much everything

hoodwinked

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

I understand we all have different opinions on how to best deal with prostitution.

If possible, can we keep this thread about how Ruhama are given free press and government funding and generally go unquestioned?

just to add they go unquestioned not just by the public and governments but in their own organisations too! :mad:

Mr. Loverman

Gummy Panda wrote: »

So you are saying rte were lying about who owes the domain and that there is no office for that group?

I would not be surprised if pimps were also involved in running that website. After all, it is not just prostitutes who make money from prostitution.

You may also be interested in this website: http://www.sexworkersallianceireland.org/index.html

Do you agree Ruhama are a problematic organisation?

Joey the lips

I find that if you listen long enough you are clouded by both arguements so i can only go with my mind and i dont agree with prostitution. I agree the best way to tackle it is to criminalize the buying rather than selling

Rochelle

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Does anyone else have a problem with this?

No, I couldn't care less.

tigger123

Bambi wrote: »

Pretty much everything

So you think prostitutes should be punished, while those who avail of their services walk free?

copeyhagen

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

For those of you who don't know, the Magdelene Laundries were forced labour camps for prostitutes.

err, were they not more for young women that had had children out of wedlock

Dravokivich

tigger123 wrote: »

What's wrong with making the demand side illegal? I think it's the way forward tbh, stop criminalising these women.

The women aren't being criminalised in any way. It is only illegal to solicit.

If Ruhuma truly had a problem with human trafficking, they wouldn't be going after the punters.

dharma200

It is just one of many examples of the church/state collusion in Ireland.

Any involevment of any person or organisation linked with the magdelene laundries should not be allowed to work with any vulnerable people, prostitutes or not. Also the state should not fund organisations that are not impartial and/or have religious leanings.

My opinion.

Criminalising prostitutes is ridiculous.

Mr. Loverman

copeyhagen wrote: »

err, were they not more for young women that had had children out of wedlock

The goal of the organisation was to "rehabilitate prostitutes", but you are partially correct, they did also take some single mothers. Most of their victims were prostitutes though.

krudler

copeyhagen wrote: »

err, were they not more for young women that had had children out of wedlock

Among other things, disgraceful part of Irish history

tigger123

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

The goal of the organisation was to "rehabilitate prostitutes", but you are partially correct, they did also take some single mothers. Most of their victims were prostitutes though.

Do you have any source to back this up? I never heard anything about a connection between the Magdelane Laundries and prostitution ... ???

Mr. Loverman

tigger123 wrote: »

Do you have any source to back this up? I never heard anything about a connection between the Magdelane Laundries and prostitution ... ???

The organisation was created to "help" prostitutes but was later expanded to include "promiscuous" women.

Their name, Magdalene, comes from the reformed prostitute Mary Magdalene.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/world/europe/25iht-abuse25.html?_r=4

Mr. Loverman

tigger123 wrote: »

Do you have any source to back this up? I never heard anything about a connection between the Magdelane Laundries and prostitution ... ???

Do you agree Ruhama are a problematic organisation?

eth0

The name Ruhama always reminds me of this lad's book

kunst nugget

tigger123 wrote: »

Do you have any source to back this up? I never heard anything about a connection between the Magdelane Laundries and prostitution ... ???

Magdalene laundries were originally rehabilitation centres for prostitutes (after Mary Magdalene) but they went on to take any 'fallen woman' because of the free labour they provided which made the laundries profitable.

http://leahlefler.hubpages.com/hub/Magdalene-Laundries-in-Ireland-and-Across-the-Western-World

discus

dharma200 wrote: »

Criminalising prostitutes is ridiculous.

Agreed, and criminalising the customers is ridiculous too.

WhatNowForUs?

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

The organisation was created to "help" prostitutes but was later expanded to include "promiscuous" women.

Their name, Magdalene, comes from the reformed prostitute Mary Magdalene.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/world/europe/25iht-abuse25.html?_r=4

Hi, I can't get in there without logging on. However I never heard that the majority of girls in there were prostitutes, I'm sure there were some.
What I believe is that it was predomanitly for out of wed lock mothers. This back then I presume in the warped minds of the church, state and society would have meant that the women would have been considered prostitutes.

liamhana

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Do you agree Ruhama are a problematic organisation?

Ridiculous assumption that there is anything not above board with Ruhama...

fact is most long serving NGOs/Charities in Ireland have some past that involves orphanages/laundries etc Not a 'glorious' past or something to be proud of but Ruhama is a Legit organisation with a board made up of lay people and funded on the basis of work plans/audited accounts etc.

Trying to say they are problematic is like saying we shouldnt support Trocaire or Vincent de Paul who both have their past/present in catholic organisations.

they are only one of the groups that support the turn off the red light project, which is up front and named...the blue light campaign? a piece of pimp led crap. Nearly 100% of prostitution in ireland is pimped and therefore forced....websites are controlled by gangs/pimps and nearly all girls are moved around the place.
Any 'buyer' should be named and shamed.

Dyr

tigger123 wrote: »

So you think prostitutes should be punished, while those who avail of their services walk free?

I said that?

I think creating situations where one party to an illegal transaction is immune to prosecution is retarded.

tigger123

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Do you agree Ruhama are a problematic organisation?

Not based on anything you've posted here.

I had no idea they were backed by a religous organisation.

kunst nugget

liamhana wrote: »

Ridiculous assumption that there is anything not above board with Ruhama...

fact is most long serving NGOs/Charities in Ireland have some past that involves orphanages/laundries etc Not a 'glorious' past or something to be proud of but Ruhama is a Legit organisation with a board made up of lay people and funded on the basis of work plans/audited accounts etc.

Trying to say they are problematic is like saying we shouldnt support Trocaire or Vincent de Paul who both have their past/present in catholic organisations.

But they were still running the Magdalene laundries for 7 years after they set up this organisation. I would prefer an organisation to help the people out there that didn't have a heavily religious bias like Ruhama.

liamhana wrote: »

they are only one of the groups that support the turn off the red light project, which is up front and named...the blue light campaign? a piece of pimp led crap. Nearly 100% of prostitution in ireland is pimped and therefore forced....websites are controlled by gangs/pimps and nearly all girls are moved around the place.

I presume you have facts to back this up?
Here is an interesting perspective from the other side of the coin:
http://storiesfrombehindtheredlight.wordpress.com/2012/03/03/acceptanc/

liamhana wrote: »

Any 'buyer' should be named and shamed.

Why not legalise prostitution and regulate it instead? Makes more sense to me.

omega666

liamhana wrote: »

Ridiculous assumption that there is anything not above board with Ruhama...

fact is most long serving NGOs/Charities in Ireland have some past that involves orphanages/laundries etc Not a 'glorious' past or something to be proud of but Ruhama is a Legit organisation with a board made up of lay people and funded on the basis of work plans/audited accounts etc.

Trying to say they are problematic is like saying we shouldnt support Trocaire or Vincent de Paul who both have their past/present in catholic organisations.

they are only one of the groups that support the turn off the red light project, which is up front and named...the blue light campaign? a piece of pimp led crap. Nearly 100% of prostitution in ireland is pimped and therefore forced....websites are controlled by gangs/pimps and nearly all girls are moved around the place.
Any 'buyer' should be named and shamed.

Clearly you know nothing about prosititution in Ireland.

Mr. Loverman

Mr. Loverman wrote:

Do you agree Ruhama are a problematic organisation?

tigger123 wrote: »

Not based on anything you've posted here.

Even though they are the same people who ran the Magdelene Laundries and ran Ruhama concurrently for 7 years?

I am surprised and saddened you have no problem with this.

Mr. Loverman

tigger123, can I ask:

Do you think the Magdelene Laundries were wrong?

tigger123

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Even though they are the same people who ran the Magdelene Laundries and ran Ruhama concurrently for 7 years?

I am surprised and saddened you have no problem with this.

As another posted said, alot of organisations have links to the Catholic Church, which itself has a questionable past. But ut doesnt follow that the organisation itself isnt doing good work. I'm not saying it is or it isnt, what I'm saying is that you've still yet to post anything which Ruhama has done which you find questionable.

Mr. Loverman

tigger123 wrote: »

As another posted said, alot of organisations have links to the Catholic Church, which itself has a questionable past. But ut doesnt follow that the organisation itself isnt doing good work. I'm not saying it is or it isnt, what I'm saying is that you've still yet to post anything which Ruhama has done which you find questionable.

They ran the Magdelene Laundries and Ruhama concurrently.

If you can't see how this means Ruhama is a problematic organisation, I think we need to agree to disagree.

tigger123

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

They ran the Magdelene Laundries and Ruhama concurrently.

If you can't see how this means Ruhama is a problematic organisation, I think we need to agree to disagree.

I don't agree to that.

So, do you think Ruhama should be shut down now because of that? Are they not doing good work and helping people now?

getz

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

The organisation was created to "help" prostitutes but was later expanded to include "promiscuous" women.

Their name, Magdalene, comes from the reformed prostitute Mary Magdalene.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/world/europe/25iht-abuse25.html?_r=4

mary magdalene was never a prostitute ,even the pope has now admitted to this,the kind of children who was put into the laundries,yes they were children, were of under age,some had babies,some were mentally retarted,or too ugly to beautiful ,or even put in by their parent/or courts for being morally promiscuous in the eyes of a catholic run ireland,the survivors of those institutions are still fighting in the courts against ireland and the church,for the years abuse they were put through

liamhana

no the religious organizations ran the laundries the voluntary lay board run ruhama. again yes the have a religious past but so do most schools, social work, youth groups etc.

Mr. Loverman

I strongly question Ruhama's motivations due to their sordid history; their definition of trafficking is dishonest; their belief that all prostitution is controlled and forced is incorrect; and their inability to provide the Gardai with sufficient evidence for most of their claims makes me doubt their honesty.

I do not believe the Government should provide funding to religious organisations which have a proven history of kidnapping and forced labour, which ironically is what they claim to be defending women from today.

I do not want to get in a debate with you as you have already made your beliefs quite clear.

kunst nugget

tigger123 wrote: »

As another posted said, alot of organisations have links to the Catholic Church, which itself has a questionable past. But ut doesnt follow that the organisation itself isnt doing good work. I'm not saying it is or it isnt, what I'm saying is that you've still yet to post anything which Ruhama has done which you find questionable.

I don't think an organisation with a strongly Catholic bias is the best fit when it comes to dealing with prostitutes. I'd prefer that any government money would go to a secular organisation that would take a more pragmatic approach.

It's one thing to say that many organisation might have had a less than ideal past but the fact of the matter is that it is only 16 years since the last laundry closed down and by that time Ruhama had been running for 7 years. I'm sorry but the 2 orders' twisted preconceptions about sexuality are not what is needed in terms of a contemporary evaluation of what needs to done with prostitution.

Mr. Loverman

liamhana wrote: »

no the religious organizations ran the laundries the voluntary lay board run ruhama. again yes the have a religious past but so do most schools, social work, youth groups etc.

I'm sorry to say you are incorrect.

http://www.ruhama.ie/page.php?intPageID=4

Ruhama was founded as a joint initiative of the Good Shepherd Sisters and Our Lady of Charity Sisters, both of which had a long history of involvement with marginalised women, including those involved in prostitution.

Their current board of directors also contains members of the Good Shepherd Sisters and Our Lady of Charity Sisters.

They are not a non-religious organisation.

tigger123

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

I strongly question Ruhama's motivations due to their sordid history; their definition of trafficking is dishonest; their belief that all prostitution is controlled and forced is incorrect; and their inability to provide the Gardai with sufficient evidence for most of their claims makes me doubt their honesty.

I do not believe the Government should provide funding to religious organisations which have a proven history of kidnapping and forced labour, which ironically is what they claim to be defending women from today.

I do not want to get in a debate with you as you have already made your beliefs quite clear.

Why did you start a thread then if you don't want to get into a debate? So people would tell you you're right?

Fuinseog

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

There are a group of nuns called the Good Shepherd Sisters and Our Lady of Charity Sisters who used to run the Magdelene Laundries and now run an organisation called Ruhama.

For about 7 years they ran both the Magdelene Laundries and Ruhama at the same time.

For those of you who don't know, the Magdelene Laundries were forced labour camps for prostitutes. They have since been closed down but the nuns refuse to accept they did anything wrong and are yet to apologise.

Ruhama is their new organisation for dealing with prostitution. (Obviously they cannot use labour camps anymore as they are outlawed.)

They believe all prostitution is forced prostitution and all foreign prostitutes are trafficked prostitutes.

They run a campaign called www.turnofftheredlight.ie which is in direct conflict with the campaign run by sex workers in Ireland, www.turnoffthebluelight.ie

Due to their history we know these women are "misguided" and we know they unapologetically committed tens of thousands of criminal acts including kidnapping and forced labour, yet for some reason the media continues to publish their stories without asking for evidence or mentioning their history.

For example, RTE currently has this story as one of their headlines: http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0822/prostitution-support-group-sees-cases-increase.html

They claim they helped 200 trafficked women last year. They have made similar claims for many, many years. Yet, there have been hardly any arrests nevermind any convictions.

I understand the media have slow news days and will publish press releases as news, but please, these are the same people who ran the Magdelene Laundries.

The also receive over EUR 700,000 in funding from the government each year.

Does anyone else have a problem with this?

nobody else wants anything to do with prossies as society has labelled them unclean.
I wonder to what extent the nuns are being scapegoated. it was not only prossies in the magdalenes. the families of the girl often brought her there. her own family disowned her and she had no where else to go. If you wish to finger point then do so at Irish society which supported such institutions.


it was also the nuns that ran hospitals in te dazs when hospitals were clean and well run palces.

Mr. Loverman

tigger123 wrote: »

Why did you start a thread then if you don't want to get into a debate? So people would tell you you're right?

I said I don't want to get into a debate with you.

You have made your beliefs quite clear.

kunst nugget

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

I'm sorry to say you are incorrect.

http://www.ruhama.ie/page.php?intPageID=4

Ruhama was founded as a joint initiative of the Good Shepherd Sisters and Our Lady of Charity Sisters, both of which had a long history of involvement with marginalised women, including those involved in prostitution.

Their current board of directors also contains members of the Good Shepherd Sisters and Our Lady of Charity Sisters.

They are not a non-religious organisation.

List of Trustees and Board of Directors:
Trustees

Sisters of Our Lady of Charity (O.L.C.)
Good Shepherd Sisters (R.G.S.)

Board of Directors

Chairperson: Ms. Valerie Judge
Company Secretary: Mr. Peter O Neill
Sr. Sheila Murphy, O.L.C.
Sr. Bernadette Mc Nally, R.G.S.
Dr. Mary Scully
Mr Colm O Dwyer
Ms. Catherine Joyce
Sr. Frances Robinson, O.L.C
Ms. Catherine Nolan
Ms. Zuilmah Wallis
Mr John O Reilly

http://www.ruhama.ie/page.php?intPageID=138

Mr. Loverman

Fuinseog wrote: »

nobody else wants anything to do with prossies as society has labelled them unclean.

That actually is not true.

There are many NGOs who offer non-judgemental assistance to prostitutes.

I am involved in one. A friend of mine is involved in another.

Ruhama is a different kettle of fish.

tigger123

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

I said I don't want to get into a debate with you.

You have made your beliefs quite clear.

Bad form dude. I'm engaging on the topic here.

kunst nugget

Fuinseog wrote: »

nobody else wants anything to do with prossies as society has labelled them unclean.

And why are they labelled unclean?

Fuinseog wrote: »

I wonder to what extent the nuns are being scapegoated. it was not only prossies in the magdalenes. the families of the girl often brought her there. her own family disowned her and she had no where else to go. If you wish to finger point then do so at Irish society which supported such institutions.

You have got to be kidding me. Have you not read the personal testimonies of the women put into these laundries? Also, if these women, some of whom were the victims of rape, were disowned by their families the reason is because of the fire and brimstone teachings of the Catholic Church in this country.

Fuinseog wrote: »

it was also the nuns that ran hospitals in te dazs when hospitals were clean and well run palces.

I would like to see that backed up with facts, please. Can you let me know what the difference in cleanliness between when the nuns ran them and now? Also, have you a breakdown in terms of infection risks in wards now and then as well?

Mr. Loverman

tigger123 wrote: »

Bad form dude. I'm engaging on the topic here.

You have already stated you have no issue with Ruhama being run by the same people who ran the Magdelene Laundries.

Let's not forget these are the same people who believe they did nothing wrong.

I asked you if you agree they did nothing wrong. You chose to ignore this question.

That tells me -- and I am sure most readers here -- everything we need to know about your opinion on this matter.

No further discussion with you is necessary.

tigger123

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

You have already stated you have no issue with Ruhama being run by the same people who ran the Magdelene Laundries.

Let's not forget these are the same people who believe they did nothing wrong.

I asked you if you agree they did nothing wrong. You chose to ignore this question.

That tells me -- and I am sure most readers here -- everything we need to know about your opinion on this matter.

No further discussion with you is necessary.

I answered your question, not according to anything you've posted here. I was asking you to back up what you were saying about Ruhama.

Mr. Loverman

tigger123 wrote: »

I answered your question, not according to anything you've posted here. I was asking you to back up what you were saying about Ruhama.

Do you think the Magdelene Laundries were wrong?

Jimminy Mc Fukhead

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

They run a campaign called www.turnofftheredlight.ie which is in direct conflict with the campaign run by sex workers in Ireland,

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Didn't prime time expose the turn off the blue light website as being run by pimps.

Can we clarify - Is this light Red, or is it Blue?