Those nuns who ran the Magdelene Laundries...

dttq

mitosis wrote: »

What a weird debate! What criminal past does this Ruhana have? All I can see is the OPs insistance that they are guilty of another's crimes, which is frankly absurd.

Ties to past organisations such as the Magdelene's with a record of criminal activity is indicative of dirty hands to me. When will people in this country finally distance themselves from an organisation (RCC) whose members lock up young girls up in concentration camps, and rape young boys in the same boxes the hynotised and mind-controlled sheep go to confess their "sins" to holy god with a huge gaff up in the clouds.

Fuinseog

mitosis wrote: »

What a weird debate! What criminal past does this Ruhana have? All I can see is the OPs insistance that they are guilty of another's crimes, which is frankly absurd.

its Roman Catholic so it must be guilty of something bad. its hard to figure out which is worse-conservative Catholicism or aggressive secularism?

Fuinseog

dttq wrote: »

Criminalising religion might be no bad idea though.

hear hear, make all Romans henceforth wear blue hats.

laoch na mona

not everyone in the laundries was a prostitute

dttq

Fuinseog wrote: »

its Roman Catholic so it must be guilty of something bad. its hard to figure out which is worse-conservative Catholicism or aggressive secularism?

Do secularists lock teenage girls up in concentration camps (conveniently referred to as laundries), or rape 10 year boys in toilets behind churches? Didn't think so. The answer you were looking for is there above if you read between the lines.

Fuinseog

dttq wrote: »

Ties to past organisations such as the Magdelene's with a record of criminal activity is indicative of dirty hands to me. When will people in this country finally distance themselves from an organisation (RCC) whose members lock up young girls up in concentration camps, and rape young boys in the same boxes the hynotised and mind-controlled sheep go to confess their "sins" to holy god with a huge gaff up in the clouds.

most rapes actually happen in the secular home. maybe we should disband the family?
how is that there was abuse in NI, a country where the catholic church had no power?

Mr. Loverman

Fuinseog wrote: »

its Roman Catholic so it must be guilty of something bad. its hard to figure out which is worse-conservative Catholicism or aggressive secularism?

Aggressive secularists might come across as dicks sometimes, but their actions are in no way comparable to the things certain Catholic organisations have done to people in this country.

Fuinseog

dttq wrote: »

Do secularists lock teenage girls up in concentration camps (conveniently referred to as laundries), or rape 10 year boys in toilets behind churches? Didn't think so. The answer you were looking for is there above if you read between the lines.

the courts send the magdalens some of these girls. surely they should made atone?
I thought they were gulags not concentration camps? no, no secularist ever raped anybody. only evil RC priests are capable of this.it is the way catholics are I tell ye

Mr. Loverman

Fuinseog wrote: »

the courts send the magdalens some of these girls. surely they should made atone?
I thought they were gulags not concentration camps? no, no secularist ever raped anybody. only evil RC priests are capable of this.it the catholics are I tell ye

Nobody has said the Catholic organisations are responsible for all or most of the sex crimes/whatever in Ireland.

But it is undeniable a small number of priests and nuns caused a significant number of problems.

Fuinseog

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Aggressive secularists might come across as dicks sometimes, but their actions are in no way comparable to the things certain Catholic organisations have done to people in this country.

aggressive secularists tend to froth at the mouth when declaring their hatred for the church and will rant away even when other people never mentioned the subject of religion.

as I said I am not sure if preaching religious hatred is healthy. why not attack the Muslims, Jews and Protestants while we are at it?
lets just shiat on anyone who has different beliefs.

Cienciano

Fuinseog wrote: »

its Roman Catholic so it must be guilty of something bad. its hard to figure out which is worse-conservative Catholicism or aggressive secularism?

"must be"?? Do you really need to be told about what happened in the launderies? It's not a big anti catholic smear campaign.

Fuinseog

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Nobody has said the Catholic organisations are responsible for all or most of the sex crimes/whatever in Ireland.

But it is undeniable a small number of priests and nuns caused a significant number of problems.

the whole catholic church is being accused here. not just a few black sheep. the catholic church has done far more for the poor in this country that the state or secular organisations ever did.

Dyr

Fuinseog wrote: »

how is that there was abuse in NI, a country where the catholic church had no power?

Brendan Smyth was an orangeman?

dttq

Fuinseog wrote: »

aggressive secularists tend to froth at the mouth when declaring their hatred for the church and will rant away even when other people never mentioned the subject of religion.

as I said I am not sure if preaching religious hatred is healthy. why not attack the Muslims, Jews and Protestants while we are at it?
lets just shiat on anyone who has different beliefs.

Do "aggressive secularists" :rolleyes: torture heretics against secularism, burn women at the stake for attending mass or kill people who disagree with their own beliefs (aka. Crusades) such as what the church had no problem doing in reverse for centuries?

byhookorbycrook

Very often, it was the families that put girls into the Magdalens.The state colluded, but managed to lay the blame in full at the door of the Catholic church.

dttq

Fuinseog wrote: »

the whole catholic church is being accused here. not just a few black sheep. the catholic church has done far more for the poor in this country that the state or secular organisations ever did.

And the Catholic Church has defended and harboured those same black sheep both now and in the past. As for helping the poor, what exactly is the RCC doing to relieve the conditions of hundreds of millions of people across the third world, while the pope sits in luxury in a palace that makes Versailles look plain in comparison.

Mr. Loverman

Fuinseog wrote: »

the whole catholic church is being accused here. not just a few black sheep. the catholic church has done far more for the poor in this country that the state or secular organisations ever did.

Well, I personally do not think all priests and nuns are bad people.

I also think if religion makes you a happier person, go for it.

But there is no denying a percentage of priests and nuns did some terrible things to a lot of people. And I am of the opinion that the Catholic church in general spreads a very warped message about sex.

kunst nugget

Fuinseog wrote: »

most rapes actually happen in the secular home. maybe we should disband the family?
how is that there was abuse in NI, a country where the catholic church had no power?

I get it. Because abuse can happen anywhere we should absolve everyone who committed abuse or colluded in covering it up. "What? you got raped by a Father? You're lucky, you could have been raped by Your Father!”

Let's say we take the Catholic approach to abuse in the home shall we? Rather than let that nasty secular state take vulnerable children into care for their own protection, we'll get some auld gee bag like Mina Bean Uí Chroibín to kick up a fuss and keep the children in the nightmare scenario they're in because that's how Jesus wants it.

Many organisations have had problems with the abuse of the vulnerable, look at Swimming Ireland as an obvious example, so it's not only a problem solely residing with the church but the Church are completely repellent in their belief that canon law outstrips the law of the state in their eyes and are completely unapologetic about the mistreatment of the young and vulnerable in their care.

golden lane

the priests and nuns that comitted the crimes are guilty.....of those crimes...

the church itself is guilty of collusion to cover up those crimes........

the state are guilty of neglect....as they did not do enough to ensure those crimes did not take place.....

that has nothing to do with a persons belief in god..........any god....

the parents that handed over their children to those people.....are guilty of ignorance...and in extreme cases, neglect..

kunst nugget

Fuinseog wrote: »

the whole catholic church is being accused here. not just a few black sheep. the catholic church has done far more for the poor in this country that the state or secular organisations ever did.

Does the Catholic Church run our social welfare system?

mitosis

dttq wrote: »

Ties to past organisations such as the Magdelene's with a record of criminal activity is indicative of dirty hands to me. When will people in this country finally distance themselves from an organisation (RCC) whose members lock up young girls up in concentration camps, and rape young boys in the same boxes the hynotised and mind-controlled sheep go to confess their "sins" to holy god with a huge gaff up in the clouds.

So you wouldn't travel in a VW, or buy a Siemens product? Correct me if I am wrong, but the discussion is not about the RC, is it? I don't know who this charity is, but I can't believe you are allowed to abuse and accuse based on the fact that some people involved were involved in another organisation.

In fact, I would like the OP to explain his interest in this organisation. He has hinted at his involvement in a rival organisation - is his own self interest what this is all about?

When asked by a poster what Ruhama have done that is criminal or wrong his response was

"Do you think the Magdelene Laundries were wrong? "

But can't or won't answer the actual question.

Odysseus

mitosis wrote: »

In fact, I would like the OP to explain his interest in this organisation. He has hinted at his involvement in a rival organisation - is his own self interest what this is all about?

When asked by a poster what Ruhama have done that is criminal or wrong his response was

"Do you think the Magdelene Laundries were wrong? "


But can't or won't answer the actual question.

That is exactly what I thought this morning when I seen this thread. I don't have any real contact with the organisation. I dealt with them over the phone a few times as some of my clients have used them as supports; but it's a few years since I have had contact with them.

I do remember thinking that they where a bit OTT for me and the most important thing for them was to get the girls to stop working. I also did find them a bit religous, but nothing that unusal for the topic at hand.

OP I'm not interested in the past, what is this organisation doing today that is not in the best interests of girls/women working the streets? In other words if a client told me she intended to access the supports they offer why would I advise them not to?

Mr. Loverman

Mitosis

In fairness, I think I have made it pretty clear what my problem with Ruhama is.

In summary: I think they have a shady history, are dishonest about how many prostitutes are trafficked or forced (due to their definitions of trafficked and forced) and generally cannot present any evidence for their claims.

I have said the above numerous times throughout this thread.

My interest in Ruhama started years ago. I was interviewing prostitutes for a publication and they claimed they are a) prostitutes because it pays well and b) they have never come across a trafficked prostitute. Around the same time I also came across this in the Irish Independent:

¨We have carried out an in-depth investigation into organised prostitution over the past 18 months and we have found no evidence of exploitation or trafficking. There are no gangs involved and there is little violence.

"The youngest girls appear to be 19 and most are in their 20s and early 30s. We have found no evidence of underage girls working - the pimps don't want to bring that kind of attention on themselves. The girls are working because they want to make money and Dublin is somewhere that they can earn a lot of money," Detective Superintendent McKeown said.

"I was very surprised when we started this investigation to find that a lot of the old myths regarding prostitution have gone out the window. It is a service that is in demand and there is a lot of money about nowadays. To put it simply, there is room for everyone and plenty of work. The pimps know one another and work side by side. They don't want trouble and there are rarely disputes."

Operation Quest have also investigated a number of lap dancing clubs but say they have found no breaches of the law within that industry and no exploitation.

"Again the girls are here willingly and it is their choice to work in the business: they are earning a lot of money. They seem to be very happy doing what they are doing. They are not breaking any criminal laws. Obviously prostitution is morally wrong but there are no laws being broken because the girls aren't soliciting sex on the streets," said McKeown.

He believes that Ireland should consider making prostitution legal and monitoring it properly.

"We do not go after the girls - we wouldn't even consider doing that. It is the organisers that we are interested in," he said. "But the fact is that prostitution is here to stay and perhaps it is time that our legislators started to consider making it legal and getting a proper handle on it. Of course that would mean that taxes would have to be paid and maybe Dublin wouldn't be as lucrative a place to work."

So I started researching Ruhama and noticed they made a lot of strong claims yet never presented any evidence. I also noticed they were linked with a lot of extremist feminist organisations and were a Catholic organisation.

It is only recently I discovered they are the same people who ran the Magdalene Laundries.

I am now involved with another NGO and have since discovered Ruhama are generally hated by prostitutes and (as you put it) "rival" NGOs.

That's my story in a nutshell

Min

dttq wrote: »

Do secularists lock teenage girls up in concentration camps (conveniently referred to as laundries), or rape 10 year boys in toilets behind churches? Didn't think so. The answer you were looking for is there above if you read between the lines.

They did and still do in countries where there is and was state atheism, in the gulags.
http://gulaghistory.org/exhibits/days-and-lives/conflict/4

Fuinseog

dttq wrote: »

Do "aggressive secularists" :rolleyes: torture heretics against secularism, burn women at the stake for attending mass or kill people who disagree with their own beliefs (aka. Crusades) such as what the church had no problem doing in reverse for centuries?

the church has moved on a bit since the Middle Ages.

Fuinseog

dttq wrote: »

And the Catholic Church has defended and harboured those same black sheep both now and in the past. As for helping the poor, what exactly is the RCC doing to relieve the conditions of hundreds of millions of people across the third world, while the pope sits in luxury in a palace that makes Versailles look plain in comparison.

the Irish government also defended paedos. the guards accidentally lost Brendan Smyths file and the government delayed his extradition.

you are tarring all catholics with the one brush.
not sure if father peter McVerry and his colleagues live in a mansion.

I am more interested in what the church is doing for the poor in Dublin rather the rest of the world.

goose2005

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Very often, it was the families that put girls into the Magdalens.The state colluded, but managed to lay the blame in full at the door of the Catholic church.

Except that the state covers something like 90% of the compensation cost?

blingrhino

MadPatrick wrote: »

I reckon the Catholic Church did more damage to Ireland in their time "in charge of everything" that the Brits did in theirs.

Everything them filthy bastards touched with their pedophile fingers went to s hit.
The nuns were just as bad as the brothers, they beat and mentally tortured the girls in the orphanages while the brothers and priests were raping the boys. And they still had the balls to stand above the people and thump their chests and guarantee hell to anyone who even thought about sex. Can you imagine the humiliation the girls in the laundries endured?

I've never visited a prostitute but I believe that any woman can do whatever she wants with her own body.
Sex trafficking is an issue for the police. If I see a priest or nun commenting on an issue I find it difficult to not side against them.

I totally agree with this statement mad Patrick and share the exact same opinion

Ronin247

Fuinseog wrote: »

hear hear those Romans should clear off with their soup kitchens and Saint Vincent de Paul. F the poor. i am sure secular ireland will look after the needy in our society. apart from provide an education for the poor what did the christian brothers ever do?

Christian Brothers......what else did they do .........rape children,beat children, mentally abuse children and generally everything which would be considered unchristian.

Rhuhama may not have the greatest history, and I would be very anti catholic church, but if they are helping any little bit and at worst doing no harm, then why oppose them?

Why does Loverman not name the NGO he works for and maybe people here will tell him the truth about his organisation.

Cienciano

Ronin247 wrote: »

Christian Brothers......what else did they do .........rape children,beat children, mentally abuse children and generally everything which would be considered unchristian.

Rhuhama may not have the greatest history, and I would be very anti catholic church, but if they are helping any little bit and at worst doing no harm, then why oppose them?

Why does Loverman not name the NGO he works for and maybe people here will tell him the truth about his organisation.

My problem with Ruhama is they tell lies in order to further their agenda. They want prostitution stopped, they spread lies in order to get it done. Now, plenty of organisations do that, but they should not be funded by the government in order to further their agenda. It's like the government funding an anti abortion crowd.
They help women, that's great. If that's all they did, great too. But the posters, website, any debates is all clearly anti prostitution.

mariaalice

All the catholic church bashing annoys me, Its a very complex area but of course every one want a simple answer and one easily identifiable baddie.

I don't agree with Ruhamas approach or their analysis of the problem but the fact that its a catholic organization and is run by nuns who use to run the laundries is not relevent IMO, remember the laundries started off with the best of intentions but for a varied of reasons became places of punishment and detention.

BlueSmoker

I reading this thread as self promoting crap, Now first let me explain.

I have being watching this thread since it started, and in fairness I actually agree with both of the most opposite Statements. So here I go ...

1) OP you didn't hold up your arugment (with facts) when asked, you kept asking the same question " Do I think the Mageline Sisters are mad? (of course I do, why wouldn't I ???

2) OP secondly you posted that a particular group was in an opinion that selling sex was wrong, I looked at the links you provided, and I see, at least 30 groups in support of "theRedlightSwitchOff". but you seem to think the group you mentioned are the leaders in this group of charities

3) You seem to think what a group did 10 years ago, it is still working off that same prinicple

4) I looked at your link to "keepbluelight", I read through the charter and I saw as many stupid statements as the other group Ruhama

5) I'm really trying to work this out and believe me I spent most of the day trying to get to the bottom of this, all I have concluded from what everyone is posting is let's generalise about this

6) And I haven't even started on debating on human trafficking, This thread actually stinks of a publicity stunt

7) Why don't you point out the links to the group, or any group(s) that are interested in protecting prostuites, or sex workers, cause I would be interested to hear their point of view

Regardless of how the OP stated his/her post, I do really what to learn more about this, and in how it effects our future, not our past. In my limited experience I assume people are fighting for that, let me know if I wrong, and I help in any way I can

What dose NGO mean?

The_Thing

I think it is, at the very least inaccurate, for TORL to claim they have the support of the unions - I'm a member of SIPTU and at no time were we asked to ballot on this.

BlueSmoker

The_Thing wrote: »

I think it is, at the very least inaccurate, for TORL to claim they have the support of the unions - I'm a member of SIPTU and at no time were we asked to ballot on this.

Can you just kiss a post?, where is is the Icon, their it is :P (wrong thread my friend):P

Yamanoto

BlueSmoker wrote: »

6) And I haven't even started on debating on human trafficking, This thread actually stinks of a publicity stunt

When do you plan on starting?

BlueSmoker wrote: »

What dose NGO mean?

Non-governmental organisation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-governmental_organization

BlueSmoker

When do you plan on starting?

In a couple of moments, bear with me



Non-governmental organisation

Why are they called that, surly they should be called Non-Profit-Organisation or (NPO) ?????

Ok that beside the point, this thread seems to be back slapping, no one seems to realise the black and white you are discussing

A) I agree with the OP prostitution should be legalised

I really don't think by slandering a RCC group (as one of 30 groups) will help, we need to be better than that

C) So the Opening Poster's, opening post failed to a certain degree, not fully, as I pointed out I want to understand this more, the OP keeps claiming these things, without very much back up, infact other posters have given me a certain amount of information backing him/her up

D) he/she claims to be part of a group that is anti this carry on, but he/she wouldn't mention the group or any other group, besides the "stopthebluelight" site, it could be his/hers

E) I need more than one site against another to make a decision for me, and I generally and I hate genalistations considered as a turth.

That is where I stand

hatrickpatrick

*sigh*

I really wish social conservatives would just get a life, then maybe they wouldn't feel the need to poke their noses into everybody else's. -_-

Chuck Stone

People selling sex has been a fact of life for centuries and will continue to be.

There are essentially two ways of dealing with the selling of sexual services.

1. Try to stop it by punishing people which is not concomitant with living in a free society. You might have some success with the criminalisation approach if you want to live in a brutal theocracy like Saudi Arabia*

2. Try to reduce the harm that orbits it (trafficking, STI's, child protection etc)

I personally think that people who subscribe to option No. 1 are lacking in both cognitive abilities and morals or a mix of the two.

*Except for the playboy Saudi princes who have their prostitutes flown in on private jets apparently

end of the road

tigger123 wrote: »

What's wrong with making the demand side illegal?

whats right with it? it wouldn't achieve anything.

tigger123 wrote: »

I think it's the way forward tbh

no it isn't. it won't solve it, it won't make it go away, it will just drive it even more underground then it allready is. how about focusing on stopping the trafficing and grooming of women and children instead of picking on those who wish to provide it and those who avail of it, decriminalising it and regulating it would allow these women to work in a safe environment taking out the pimps hopefully, any man who tries to force the woman to do something she doesn't want to do will be banned from using sex workers.

tigger123 wrote: »

stop criminalising these women.

completely agree.

end of the road

mariaalice wrote: »

the laundries started off with the best of intentions

<snip>

end of the road

tigger123 wrote: »

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

no, neither side should be punished. go after trafficers and those who groom and force people into prostitution. not those who want to provide the service and those who wish to avail of it, i'm sure most people who use prostitutes are not psycos but use such services for whatever reason.

BlueSmoker

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

*sigh*

I really wish social conservatives would just get a life, then maybe they wouldn't feel the need to poke their noses into everybody else's. -_-

I really just try to get an handle on what one extreme is saying to another extreme. and what I believe is a poster campaign.

I'm all in for adults who what to sell sex as consenting adults, and those in the sex services to be protected

But this thread is confusing, and I would love to get to the bottom of, basically everyone is stating an opinion, I want to see a little more facts, particular when the Opening Post suggested things that aren't true, or lead my to believe certains where true, the group he is talking about is one in 30 that are part of the website (stoptheredlight). Most do work protecting women.
(female friends of mine have gone to some of them, particularly after they have being raped)

And he won't mention the organisation he works for (I understand that), but he said their where others, at least mention them.

The only link I was shown was what others said "from Pimps" At least give me a chance to process the information, that you may have, on the other side of the coin, I know at least one girl "who gave a blow job for her taxi fare home"

The present is the only way you can get this going, Prove this group is wrong in it's unity and in the last couple of years.

good luck

Mr. Loverman

BlueSmoker, you need to read the full thread. I understand it is long so the temptation to skim it is there (we are all guilty of that), but if you read the full thread you will see things like this link: http://www.sexworkersallianceireland.org/

We have also spoken about the origins of www.turnofftheredlight.ie (I don't know what stoptheredlight.ie is...?)

We have also spoken about Ruhama's past, how they are the same people who ran the laundries, and how they refuse to admit any wrongdoings or apologise.

We have also spoken about how they think all foreign prostitutes are in effect trafficked and forced.

So you will find a lot of the answers to your questions if you read the thread.

Yamanoto

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

We have also spoken about how they think all foreign prostitutes are in effect trafficked and forced.

I'd be doubtful Ruhama believe the above themselves tbh.

Conflating the selling of sex with human-trafficking and child-prostitution seems to have delivered results - it's undoubtedly gained traction in the consciousness of public and policy-makers alike. Essentially, they have a moral objection to the sale of sex in any form, even where that transaction is entered into freely.

Given the more progressive social climate we now enjoy, it's expedient for them to shift the emphasis from their fundamental objections and instead frame the message in such a way that will resonate with the values of people in modern Ireland - human rights, gender equality, child protection etc.

Jimminy Mc Fukhead

Did they use Dryers in the Laundries or did they put the stuff out on the line?

getz

Jimminy Mc Fukhead wrote: »

Did they use Dryers in the Laundries or did they put the stuff out on the line?

why dont you ask them magdalenelaundries.com

Jimminy Mc Fukhead

getz wrote: »

why dont you ask them magdalenelaundries.com

Thanks for the link.

I did ask. In case you're wondering, on the line in good weather, on the radiator or the back of the sofa if it's raining.

Ostrom

copeyhagen wrote: »

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

Although they accepted some pregnant women in their later years, there were separate 'mother and baby homes' for young mothers - although June Goulding's account of her time as a nurse states that women were also put to work without compensation. Frances Finnegan's 'do penance or perish' provides documentary evidence of the nature of magdalan refuges, which were far more punitive, and run with the explicit intention of retaining women in residence beyond 'rehabilitation'

Fuinseog

the catholic brigade conveniently overlook that the Protestants also had homes for unmarried mothers.

kunst nugget

Fuinseog wrote: »

the catholic brigade conveniently overlook that the Protestants also had homes for unmarried mothers.

Tbf, this thread is about the connection between Ruhama and the Magdalene laundries, whose abuse of women in its care is public knowledge. If Ruhama had been connected with, for instance, the Bethany House we would be discussing that instead.