Anti Prostitution Radio Advertisements

mikhail

Mad_maxx wrote: »

The one area I'm in agreement with the feminists is regarding prostitution, accepting this is not on, men don't need to buy sex

Is that really a feminist position? Her body, her choice, I hear.

Empty_Space

KiKi III wrote: »

And how do you know when you visit a brothel or hotel room that the woman is there by choice and not being exploited?

I never visited a brothel.

If person is not there by choice, that's a crime and it's up to the gards to resolve. Like if I smuggle in a third world person and keep them to clean my house for no pay. That's also a human right issue but does not tarnish the cleaning profession.

KiKi III

Proton Rocket wrote: »

Why not let two consenting adults choose to have sex in exchange for cash if they wish?

Feminists are the nuns of the 21st century.

I’m a feminist and I absolutely love getting the ride. It’s a healthy, normal, fun part of life.

Prostitution is not.

Vic_08

KiKi III wrote: »

A large portion of the instances probably can be stopped. We absolutely should not make it a societal norm that women are commodities to be bought and sold.

We are all commodities, that is why it is called the labour MARKET.

The exception you are making for sex work is based on forcing your morals around sex onto everyone else. Nobody should be forced into doing anything against their will, and lets be clear more people internationally are trafficked for non-sex labour, the fact YOU cannot comprehend having sex for money is no reason to criminalise those that don't feel the same way.

KiKi III wrote: »

You’re continually ignoring the conversation around sex trafficking and pimps forcing vulnerable women into prostitution. Why? Because it doesn’t sit well with you. Yes, the truth is ugly - so you don’t want to look too close at it.

I don't. I fully support sex workers fight to decriminalise their profession as well as putting in place laws, enforcement and resources that is effective in tackling trafficking and sex slavery.

Conflating the two topics by insisting that prostitution should be criminalised only serves only to further victimise already marginalised sex workers while doing nothing to help trafficking victims. Much of this conflation being is done by people such as Ruhama whose real motivation is pushing deeply conservative moralistic social policies, using the topic of sex trafficking to hide their real agenda.

Still waters

KiKi III wrote: »

A large portion of the instances probably can be stopped. We absolutely should not make it a societal norm that women are commodities to be bought and sold.

You’re continually ignoring the conversation around sex trafficking and pimps forcing vulnerable women into prostitution. Why? Because it doesn’t sit well with you. Yes, the truth is ugly - so you don’t want to look too close at it.

Why women only? Men are involved in the trade as well, do they not matter when it comes to protecting people

I'm not ignoring anything, if anything is true it's you who is ignoring that making laws that criminalise people for buying sex makes absolutely no dent in the need for sex people working in the sex industry, the need is still there, it accomplishes nothing. If you can't see that a regulated sex industry is good for people then i feel sorry for the people you're trying to protect

Still waters

Still waters wrote: »

how would you reduce the demand for one of the most basic needs of men ?

One of men's most basic needs is to pay a prostitute for sex?

anewme

Vic_08 wrote: »

It is obviously too far a stretch for you to respect them enough to allow them to define themselves as sex workers or to respect them to define what they want to do with their bodies.

Your attitude is neither respectful or helpful to the people you are purporting concern for, the reason why slang terms for prostitutes are still considered so disrespectful is because of the stigma attached to sex workers that is perpetuated by forcing morality beliefs that people such as yourself hold onto others.

Talk to sex workers, they may or may not find being called hookers disrespectful, what they will find disrespectful is being looked down and judged by people such as yourself because of what they choose to do in private.

Show me where I looked down on anyone.

You are assuming they all have a choice. Many dont.

KiKi III

Empty_Space wrote: »

I never visited a brothel.

If person is not there by choice, that's a crime and it's up to the gards to resolve. Like if I smuggle in a third world person and keep them to clean my house for no pay. That's also a human right issue but does not tarnish the cleaning profession.

If it’s rampant across an industry (which it is in the sex industry), then it does tarnish the profession. And yes, it is a crime, one carried out by sophisticated criminal gangs who go to considerable effort to avoid being detected by the Gardaí.

The simplest way to reduce prostitution is to reduce demand. It’s not inevitable that men will end up going to prostitutes. It’s a choice, just like choosing to take coke even though you know you’re lining the pockets of gangs.

Empty_Space

KiKi III wrote: »

I’m a feminist and I absolutely love getting the ride. It’s a healthy, normal, fun part of life.

Prostitution is not.

Woman's rights to make their own decisions and choose their own morals, as long as it's been cleared with Kiki to be normal first.

Empty_Space

KiKi III wrote: »

If it’s rampant across an industry (which it is in the sex industry), then it does tarnish the profession. And yes, it is a crime, one carried out by sophisticated criminal gangs who go to considerable effort to avoid being detected by the Gardaí.

The simplest way to reduce prostitution is to reduce demand. It’s not inevitable that men will end up going to prostitutes. It’s a choice, just like choosing to take coke even though you know you’re lining the pockets of gangs.

Agreed, we need to stop the criminal gangs.

We also should protect a person's rights to make their own decisions.

KiKi III

Vic_08 wrote: »

We are all commodities, that is why it is called the labour MARKET.

The exception you are making for sex work is based on forcing your morals around sex onto everyone else. Nobody should be forced into doing anything against their will, and lets be clear more people internationally are trafficked for non-sex labour, the fact YOU cannot comprehend having sex for money is no reason to criminalise those that don't feel the same way.



I don't. I fully support sex workers fight to decriminalise their profession as well as putting in place laws, enforcement and resources that is effective in tackling trafficking and sex slavery.

Conflating the two topics by insisting that prostitution should be criminalised only serves only to further victimise already marginalised sex workers while doing nothing to help trafficking victims. Much of this conflation being is done by people such as Ruhama whose real motivation is pushing deeply conservative moralistic social policies, using the topic of sex trafficking to hide their real agenda.

You obviously haven’t read my posts.

I’ve made two things clear: 1. I understand the sex trade will never be eradicated and 2. I understand that some women willingly choose prostitution as a profession.

My point is that many don’t, and when you walk into a hotel room or brothel most of the time you you really have no idea whether the woman is being exploited or is there of her own free will.

And is that a chance you’re willing to take?

Still waters

KiKi III wrote: »

Ah if he starts calling them people he might have to start thinking of them as people and that would complicate his world view.

Unnecessary, I've given you no reason to respond like this in what was proving to be a topical interesting debate, resorting to this style of posting only makes you seem petty and belligerent, i see people working in the sex industry as i see everyone else in this world, for you to say otherwise is frankly disgusting

KiKi III

Empty_Space wrote: »

Woman's rights to make their own decisions and choose their own morals, as long as it's been cleared with Kiki to be normal first.

You’re acting like I’m up on my high horse and getting all moralistic.

Well if that’s what it means to say it’s not acceptable for criminal gangs to sell vulnerable women’s bodies to men, so be it.

anewme

Empty_Space wrote: »

Woman's rights to make their own decisions and choose their own morals, as long as it's been cleared with Kiki to be normal first.

If they are trafficked, they have no rights.

KiKi III

Still waters wrote: »

Unnecessary, I've given you no reason to respond like this in what was proving to be a topical interesting debate, resorting to this style of posting only makes you seem petty and belligerent, i see people working in the sex industry as i see everyone else in this world, for you to say otherwise is frankly disgusting

Honestly, your posts show more empathy to horny men than exploited women and I think that’s disgusting.

Your opinion of me means literally nothing to me.

Empty_Space

anewme wrote: »

If they are trafficked, they have no rights.

Correct, so that's a crime. I'm pro rights here.

mycro2013

Should the government not just decriminalise and regulate the industry.

Empty_Space

Empty_Space wrote: »

Agreed, we need to stop the criminal gangs.

We also should protect a person's rights to make their own decisions.

Which person? What decisions?

KiKi III

mycro2013 wrote: »

Should the government not just decriminalise and regulate the industry.

This hasn’t worked well in other countries like Germany where sex trafficking is still a problem. I used to advocate legalisation and regulation until I heard this.

Vic_08

anewme wrote: »

You are assuming they all have a choice. Many dont.

And you are conflating people who chose to do something with those who are forced by criminals.

Sex workers are people who should not be moralised to by you or anyone else, sex trafficking victims are people who should be assisted by law enforcement by having criminal gangs rounded up and locked away in stinking holes for the rest of their lives.

One thing is for sure, moralising against sex workers makes the latter even less likely to happen because as long as sex work is perceived to be the preserve of people only deserving of scorn or at best pity those trapped in the criminal underground will never be seen as a priority for crime agencies.

We saw a version of that in Britain with all the scandals over Pakistani sex gangs grooming, coercing and pimping young girls right under the noses of the authorities. What was the general attitude of the Police and local authorities ignoring these crimees: "sure they are only whores"

The fact that you are so entrenched in your personal beliefs that prostitution is bad, wrong, dirty, immoral, etc that you cannot see the stigma this attitude promotes is a large part of the reason sex trafficking is so poorly policed is sad.

Still waters

KiKi III wrote: »

Honestly, your posts show more empathy to horny men than exploited women and I think that’s disgusting.

Your opinion of me means literally nothing to me.

Where have i shown empathy to anyone, i want to see a reform of an industry that exploits people working in the sex industry, unlike yourself i don't bury my head in the sand and make believe that we can regulate "horny" out of men, you need to up your game and stop with the childish sniping, and I'll once again ask you to provide links to say the new laws brought in to protect people working in the sex industry are better protected now than before

Empty_Space

KiKi III wrote: »

Okay with it would be a good way of putting it. I don’t object to it but I’ll admit I’m not fully comfortable with it. I don’t think it’s good for either the individuals involved or for society more broadly.

Thanks Kiki, that's a fair comment, you haven't been stuck on one line of thinking and I'd be of a similar line of thought.
I don't think its particularly is a good life choice for a woman, but a person should be able to make a choice. It's a free world. For some people they might be delighted with it, each to their own.

Problem with the ad is it's like something from the stone age and not getting to the root of the problem, the criminal gangs.

KiKi III

Still waters wrote: »

Where have i shown empathy to anyone, i want to see a reform of an industry that exploits people working in the sex industry, unlike yourself i don't bury my head in the sand and make believe that we can regulate "horny" out of men, you need to up your game and stop with the childish sniping, and I'll once again ask you to provide links to say the new laws brought in to protect people working in the sex industry are better protected now than before

I never said they were better protected now, so why do you keep asking me for links to back up a point I never made?

Empty_Space

KiKi III wrote: »

This hasn’t worked well in other countries like Germany where sex trafficking is still a problem. I used to advocate legalisation and regulation until I heard this.

More resources needed to protect human rights.

anewme

Vic_08 wrote: »

And you are conflating people who chose to do something with those who are forced by criminals.

Sex workers are people who should not be moralised to by you or anyone else, sex trafficking victims are people who should be assisted by law enforcement by having criminal gangs rounded up and locked away in stinking holes for the rest of their lives.

One thing is for sure, moralising against sex workers makes the latter even less likely to happen because as long as sex work is perceived to be the preserve of people only deserving of scorn or at best pity those trapped in the criminal underground will never be seen as a priority for crime agencies.

We saw a version of that in Britain with all the scandals over Pakistani sex gangs grooming, coercing and pimping young girls right under the noses of the authorities. What was the general attitude of the Police and local authorities ignoring these crimees: "sure they are only whores"

The fact that you are so entrenched in your personal beliefs that prostitution is bad, wrong, dirty, immoral, etc that you cannot see the stigma this attitude promotes is a large part of the reason sex trafficking is so poorly policed is sad.

Please cut to the chase and stop waffling and deflecting with your one way monologues. It is just gaslighting.

Again as per my previous post, show me where I ( or others) said prostitution is bad, dirty, immoral on this thread.

I cant actually see where anyone did.

Still waters

Still waters wrote: »

make believe that we can regulate "horny" out of men

Why do you feel horny men = visiting prostitutes?

mycro2013

KiKi III wrote: »

This hasn’t worked well in other countries like Germany where sex trafficking is still a problem. I used to advocate legalisation and regulation until I heard this.

Australia's system appears to be the most effective model with it being seen as a legitimate business. But like all industries there will always be rogue operators.

Ulysses Gaze

KiKi III wrote: »

This hasn’t worked well in other countries like Germany where sex trafficking is still a problem. I used to advocate legalisation and regulation until I heard this.

Legalisation will not stop trafficking. Nothing will.

At least legalising it will do a couple of things.


- Make it safer for women that want to work in the industry to do so.
- Introduce compulsory STI testing as exists in places like Austria
- Taxing earnings on escorts and brothels will give governments even more money to help stymie trafficking to a degree.

The model we have followed, the Swedish model of prosecuting Johns, is going to do nothing.

Vic_08

Vic_08 wrote: »

And you are conflating people who chose to do something with those who are forced by criminals.

Sex workers are people who should not be moralised to by you or anyone else, sex trafficking victims are people who should be assisted by law enforcement by having criminal gangs rounded up and locked away in stinking holes for the rest of their lives.

One thing is for sure, moralising against sex workers makes the latter even less likely to happen because as long as sex work is perceived to be the preserve of people only deserving of scorn or at best pity those trapped in the criminal underground will never be seen as a priority for crime agencies.

We saw a version of that in Britain with all the scandals over Pakistani sex gangs grooming, coercing and pimping young girls right under the noses of the authorities. What was the general attitude of the Police and local authorities ignoring these crimees: "sure they are only whores"

The fact that you are so entrenched in your personal beliefs that prostitution is bad, wrong, dirty, immoral, etc that you cannot see the stigma this attitude promotes is a large part of the reason sex trafficking is so poorly policed is sad.

Somehow comparing the sexual abuse & rape of young girls with prostitutes!
You came up with that.....

KiKi III

Vic_08 wrote: »

And you are conflating people who chose to do something with those who are forced by criminals.

Sex workers are people who should not be moralised to by you or anyone else, sex trafficking victims are people who should be assisted by law enforcement by having criminal gangs rounded up and locked away in stinking holes for the rest of their lives.

One thing is for sure, moralising against sex workers makes the latter even less likely to happen because as long as sex work is perceived to be the preserve of people only deserving of scorn or at best pity those trapped in the criminal underground will never be seen as a priority for crime agencies.

We saw a version of that in Britain with all the scandals over Pakistani sex gangs grooming, coercing and pimping young girls right under the noses of the authorities. What was the general attitude of the Police and local authorities ignoring these crimees: "sure they are only whores"

The fact that you are so entrenched in your personal beliefs that prostitution is bad, wrong, dirty, immoral, etc that you cannot see the stigma this attitude promotes is a large part of the reason sex trafficking is so poorly policed is sad.

Nope, I’ve heard of Irish girls working as “sugar babies” and making a fortune of rich auld fellas and I don’t have a moralistic view that is bad/ dirty/ wrong/ immoral.

I’m still not totally comfortable with it (I would wonder what it would do to their mental health in the long term among other risks) but there’s certainly a part of me that thinks good for them.

All my posts are centred around women who are trafficked and exploited, they are my main concern and no one on the thread has said anything that allays those concerns for me.

KiKi III

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Legalisation will not stop trafficking. Nothing will.

At least legalising it will do a couple of things.


- Make it safer for women that want to work in the industry to do so.
- Introduce compulsory STI testing as exists in places like Austria
- Taxing earnings on escorts and brothels will give governments even more money to help stymie trafficking to a degree.

The model we have followed, the Swedish model of prosecuting Johns, is going to do nothing.

It would do those things, and there are some benefits to them. It’s difficult to say whether those benefits would be outweighed by the long-term detrimental effects to the individuals involved and to society.

I used to be very pro-legalisation and regulation/ taxation but I’m just not confident at the moment that there are enough pros to outweigh the cons, and that the irish government would introduce it in an effective way.

Still waters

KiKi III wrote: »

This hasn’t worked well in other countries like Germany where sex trafficking is still a problem. I used to advocate legalisation and regulation until I heard this.

You keep saying this like it means anything, it's a nonsensical lazy argument, if people like you were in charge we'd still be living in grass huts, as a feminist you should be a lot more willing to adapt and change rather than just accepting that if something is only half broken then it'll do fine, if people like you were feminists in the early 20th century women would still be looking foe the vote

KiKi III

Still waters wrote: »

You keep saying this like it means anything, it's a nonsensical lazy argument, if people like you were in charge we'd still be living in grass huts, as a feminist you should be a lot more willing to adapt and change rather than just accepting that if something is only half broken then it'll do fine, if people like you were feminists in the early 20th century women would still be looking foe the vote

Cool story, bro.

Empty_Space

Still waters wrote: »

You keep saying this like it means anything, it's a nonsensical lazy argument, if people like you were in charge we'd still be living in grass huts, as a feminist you should be a lot more willing to adapt and change rather than just accepting that if something is only half broken then it'll do fine, if people like you were feminists in the early 20th century women would still be looking foe the vote

Yep "it should be legalized" but we can't legalize as the police/government are useless argument..we have reached the real problem so. The criminal gangs must be strangled.

tea and coffee

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

It's been a good while since i checked, but look up 'irish escorts' or escort ireland, or whatever it's called and you'd see mostly foreigners, eastern european, south american, here for a few weeks, a month.
It'll give the dates they are available, check a few weeks later, a whole different set of girls.

Are these 'trafficked', or are they 'on tour'?

Trafficked. They are brought in by pimps to an area for a set time, as you say for a few weeks to X town. Then they are moved on to the next place. They usually give a few weeks notice so you can "book in"
Don't assume that "what you see if what you get" from those websites either.
Also, I have heard it alleged thst there are trends for different women from different places, which, if true, is horrible. Women are not the latest pair of trendy shoes. >:-(

The ad is about not making excuses for it, and yet there have been a few on this thread excusing it already.
There was a campaign done a while back where a phone number was given out (think Call 086 1234567 for a good time) and when people called the number the "girl" on the other end said - I've been trafficked etc. . The vast majority of callers after hearing that said.... "I'll help you"?? No! The vast majority said "how much?"
That is truly an indictment of us as people.

eviltwin

KiKi III wrote: »

It would do those things, and there are some benefits to them. It’s difficult to say whether those benefits would be outweighed by the long-term detrimental effects to the individuals involved and to society.

I used to be very pro-legalisation and regulation/ taxation but I’m just not confident at the moment that there are enough pros to outweigh the cons, and that the irish government would introduce it in an effective way.

You'll never make it safe for everyone and regulation won't do anything to address the issue of child abuse and other illegal practices but its better than nothing. Currently these women and men are invisible and unprotected, they deserve better than that.

KiKi III

Empty_Space wrote: »

Yep "it should be legalized" but we can't legalize as the police/government are useless argument..we have reached the real problem so.

It’s a complicated problem with a number of layers, so it needs a more nuanced solution than “Just legalise it and everything will be fine”...

Still waters

bubblypop wrote: »

Why do you feel horny men = visiting prostitutes?

I don't think i said that

KiKi III

eviltwin wrote: »

You'll never make it safe for everyone and regulation won't do anything to address the issue of child abuse and other illegal practices but its better than nothing. Currently these women and men are invisible and unprotected, they deserve better than that.

I am 100% with you on that.

The consensus on the thread seems to be to leave things as they are now, which is problematic for reasons that have been highlighted, or legalise it, which is problematic for different reasons.

I think anyone suggesting simple solutions like “legalise it” without fully thinking through how that would work is very naive.

Still waters

KiKi III wrote: »

Cool story, bro.

A fitting reply

Empty_Space

KiKi III wrote: »

It’s a complicated problem with a number of layers, so it needs a more nuanced solution than “Just legalise it and everything will be fine”...

Legalize to protect a person's right to make own decisions. That right needs to be forefront.
If there are crimes committed thereafter, again act to protect the people's rights. Stamp out the criminals.

People need to be consistent in protecting rights and pushing their own morals on others.

Still waters

Still waters wrote: »

I don't think i said that

Your posts include,
Innocent men
Basic needs of men
Horny men
Etc etc
While you have called the girls whores
I think it's fairly obvious what your opinion is on prostitutes

You are more sympathetic to the poor 'innocent' men then the poor trafficked women

Vic_08

KiKi III wrote: »

You obviously haven’t read my posts.

I’ve made two things clear: 1. I understand the sex trade will never be eradicated and 2. I understand that some women willingly choose prostitution as a profession.

I have read your posts, by all means explain why anyone of age who wishes to willingly engages in sexual activity for money should be criminalised or forced to work in the black market to do so?

KiKi III wrote: »

My point is that many don’t, and when you walk into a hotel room or brothel most of the time you you really have no idea whether the woman is being exploited or is there of her own free will.

And is that a chance you’re willing to take?

I don't, if I wanted to pay for sex I could quite easily find someone that is working by choice.

Expecting everyone to chose not to partake of prostitution that may or may not be coerced either because their heartstrings have been tugged by tales of trafficked women or because an ineffective law has been passed is just fairytale fantasy, the only way to deal with exploitation is to target the exploiters.

KiKi III

Empty_Space wrote: »

Legalize to protect a person's right to make own decisions. That right needs to be forefront.
If there are crimes committed thereafter, again act to protect the people's rights. Stamp out the criminals.

People need to be consistent in protecting rights and pushing their own morals on others.

We’ll have to agree to disagree. We’re going around in circles at this stage which is generally an good time to call it a night.

Fundamentally, you seem to believe that individual’s rights to buy and sell sex is more important than protecting vulnerable people from criminal gangs and that’s not a position I can get onboard with.

Empty_Space

Empty_Space wrote: »

Legalize to protect a person's right to make own decisions.

Asked you this already
Which people & what rights?

Vic_08

Vic_08 wrote: »

I have read your posts, by all means explain why anyone of age who wishes to willingly engages in sexual activity for money should be criminalised or forced to work in the black market to do so?




I don't, if I wanted to pay for sex I could quite easily find someone that is working by choice.

Expecting everyone to chose not to partake of prostitution that may or may not be coerced either because their heartstrings have been tugged by tales of trafficked women or because an ineffective law has been passed is just fairytale fantasy, the only way to deal with exploitation is to target the exploiters.

How is it fairytale fantasy?
Surely if a decent man, who actually cares about human rights, wants to pay for sex, he will find someone who is selling because they want to?
Why would a decent man just pay for sex with some woman if he thinks they are there against their will?

Unless you are suggesting that men who pay for sex don't care about the rights of the women they are paying?

Empty_Space

KiKi III wrote: »

We’ll have to agree to disagree. We’re going around in circles at this stage which is generally an good time to call it a night.

Fundamentally, you seem to believe that individual’s rights to buy and sell sex is more important than protecting vulnerable people from criminal gangs and that’s not a position I can get onboard with.

Ok, we are going a bit in circles.

Last one I promise.
I don't think an individuals right to buy/sell sex is more important. I just think both are not dependent. Prioritise a person's rights and commit fully and we will get there.
Once a person's rights are taken away for their own good we are on a slippery slope, instead tackle the root of the problem.

Vic_08

KiKi III wrote: »

This hasn’t worked well in other countries like Germany where sex trafficking is still a problem. I used to advocate legalisation and regulation until I heard this.

Decriminalising alone won't magically disappear the gangs, Germany just stopped pretending that it was something they were prepared to put resources into policing.

They have not put the required resources into tackling the criminal gangs so they still operate lucrative sex trafficking rings.

Still waters

bubblypop wrote: »

Your posts include,
Innocent men
Basic needs of men
Horny men
Etc etc
While you have called the girls whores
I think it's fairly obvious what your opinion is on prostitutes

You are more sympathetic to the poor 'innocent' men then the poor trafficked women

You're reading things i haven't written down to fit your own agenda, I'm firmly on the side of a safe regulated industry for both men and women, i apologized in a previous post for the use of the word hookers, i apologise again, i quoted "horny" in reply to kiki, i never mention whores in any of my posts in a derogatory manner.

Vic_08

bubblypop wrote: »

How is it fairytale fantasy?
Surely if a decent man, who actually cares about human rights, wants to pay for sex, he will find someone who is selling because they want to?
Why would a decent man just pay for sex with some woman if he thinks they are there against their will?

He would, as I said if I wanted to I would find one, it really isn't that difficult if you put a small amount of effort into it.

It's fantasy to expect everyone to care enough or think past their own desires enough to care.

bubblypop wrote: »

Unless you are suggesting that men who pay for sex don't care about the rights of the women they are paying?

Some do, some don't, some are ignorant, some probably do know or have suspicions but convince themselves otherwise in order to justify their actions.

As the whole industry is essentially black-market it is near impossible to get accurate data, much of what is out there is unreliable because it comes from groups with agendas.