Anti Prostitution Radio Advertisements

Still waters

Still waters wrote: »

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.

I don't have an agenda & I merely quoted what you have said.
I'm not sure how you can say whores is not derogatory
It seems from your posts, that you believe men are too horny, innocent & their basic needs involves paying for sex!
Thankfully most men do not believe this.

KiKi III

Vic_08 wrote: »

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.

If Ireland manages to adequately tackle gangland crime, which it hasn’t been having much success with lately, I’d feel more comfortable about introducing legislation regarding sex work between consenting adults.

To me, the logical order to do things in is “get rid of the criminal gangs and then introduce legislation that protects sex workers and their customers”. Trying to do it the other way round doesn’t make sense.

If the Gardaí can’t tackle the gangs first, there’s no reason to believe they would after, so you’d just have a situation like you described in Germany where prostitution is legal but the gangs and exploitation still exist - basically the worst of all worlds.

If they can break up the gangs, protect sex workers through legislation and protect customers with STI tests, I would be open to changing my view again.

Vic_08

Vic_08 wrote: »

, much of what is out there is unreliable because it comes from groups with agendas.

What agendas?

Still waters

bubblypop wrote: »

I don't have an agenda & I merely quoted what you have said.
I'm not sure how you can say whores is not derogatory
It seems from your posts, that you believe men are too horny, innocent & their basic needs involves paying for sex!
Thankfully most men do not believe this.

It seems you think its ok to make stuff up as you go along, good luck to you

Quantum Erasure

tea and coffee wrote: »

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

Trafficked. They are brought in by pimps to an area for a set time,

I'm not sure having a pimp necessarily means they are being forced,

Quantum Erasure

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

I'm not sure having a pimp necessarily means they are being forced,

They are brought in by traffickers then. Perhaps the word 'pimp' is just used to easily

Vic_08

bubblypop wrote: »

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

No I didn't. I compared the lack of a damn given to these victims to the attitude in general towards prostitutes.

The British police and social services knew of the abuse, knew the girls were under age, knew they were being pimped by the abusers, knew the abusers often by name and justified not taking action because of community sensitivities and because the victims were just whores, just prostitutes that weren't deserving of being considered as victims because they fukked for money or booze or whatever.

If prostitutes, particularly ones from poor backgrounds weren't considered low lifes, criminals and slags who weren't deserving of protection or the consideration given to normal members of society there is no way the ignoring of the abuse of those girls could have been tolerated by the authorities involved. They were seen as willingly having sex for money or favours and the fact it was abusive, criminal due to their age alone or even coerced was ignored because the prevailing attitude was that prozzies got what they deserved.

The attitude toward prostitution in general was central to the authorities attitude to these girls abuse.

anewme

Vic_08 wrote: »

No I didn't. I compared the lack of a damn given to these victims to the attitude in general towards prostitutes.

The British police and social services knew of the abuse, knew the girls were under age, knew they were being pimped by the abusers, knew the abusers often by name and justified not taking action because of community sensitivities and because the victims were just whores, just prostitutes that weren't deserving of being considered as victims because they fukked for money or booze or whatever.

If prostitutes, particularly ones from poor backgrounds weren't considered low lifes, criminals and slags who weren't deserving of protection or the consideration given to normal members of society there is no way the ignoring of the abuse of those girls could have been tolerated by the authorities involved. They were seen as willingly having sex for money or favours and the fact it was abusive, criminal due to their age alone or even coerced was ignored because the prevailing attitude was that prozzies got what they deserved.

The attitude toward prostitution in general was central to the authorities attitude to these girls abuse.

You keep blaming an attitude towards prostitution and blaming people of moralising despite the fact that no one here has displayed any attitude.

Quantum Erasure

bubblypop wrote: »

They are brought in by traffickers then. Perhaps the word 'pimp' is just used to easily

well, that's what i'm getting at, are they classed as trafficked simply by virtue of coming into the country as sex workers?

Vic_08

KiKi III wrote: »

If Ireland manages to adequately tackle gangland crime, which it hasn’t been having much success with lately, I’d feel more comfortable about introducing legislation regarding sex work between consenting adults.

To me, the logical order to do things in is “get rid of the criminal gangs and then introduce legislation that protects sex workers and their customers”. Trying to do it the other way round doesn’t make sense.

If the Gardaí can’t tackle the gangs first, there’s no reason to believe they would after, so you’d just have a situation like you described in Germany where prostitution is legal but the gangs and exploitation still exist - basically the worst of all worlds.

If they can break up the gangs, protect sex workers through legislation and protect customers with STI tests, I would be open to changing my view again.

What will happen is what is already happening, much the same as was before the legislation was changed.

The criminals carry on regardless and very occasionally some unlucky punter will lose the illegal john lottery and be hauled up in front of the courts while 99.999% don't.

As well as that lad a few low hanging fruit on the supply side will be done, not the organisers or the people making a fortune out of tafficking of course, just like the pointless war on drugs, mostly the low level scumbags will occasionally get their collar felt.

Of course in the sex game the low hanging fruit for the authorities are the prostitutes themselves, I notice none of you seem bothered enough by the article I linked to showing that the people who end up with the prison sentences are the girls themselves, two young Eastern European girls, do we think they were freely working or trafficked? No matter, the Irish justice system gave them what they deserved, a stint in lock-up and a criminal record.

Are there any ****s all the anti prostitution lot would like to offer up for these girls situation and the fact that all that was done for them by the state and justice system was to victimise them?

This is the reality of the laws surrounding prostitution in Ireland, all it does is marginalise, criminalise and push prostitutes into the underworld for fear of being targeted by the police under the Victorian morality laws we still enforce.

Quantum Erasure

Quantum Erasure wrote: »

well, that's what i'm getting at, are they classed as trafficked simply by virtue of coming into the country as sex workers?

But the truth is the majority of the foreign girls working in the sex trade here were brought in, they were trafficked in.
The girls that are in brothels around the country & moved every few weeks are not doing it because they want to. They have no other choice
They are trafficked sex workers

Vic_08

Vic_08 wrote: »

No I didn't. I compared the lack of a damn given to these victims to the attitude in general towards prostitutes.

The British police and social services knew of the abuse, knew the girls were under age, knew they were being pimped by the abusers, knew the abusers often by name and justified not taking action because of community sensitivities and because the victims were just whores, just prostitutes that weren't deserving of being considered as victims because they fukked for money or booze or whatever.

If prostitutes, particularly ones from poor backgrounds weren't considered low lifes, criminals and slags who weren't deserving of protection or the consideration given to normal members of society there is no way the ignoring of the abuse of those girls could have been tolerated by the authorities involved. They were seen as willingly having sex for money or favours and the fact it was abusive, criminal due to their age alone or even coerced was ignored because the prevailing attitude was that prozzies got what they deserved.

The attitude toward prostitution in general was central to the authorities attitude to these girls abuse.

What?
You have just assumed that an attitude to prostitutes was the reason that police failed these girls!
There is no evidence of this whatsoever.
These girls were failed because they came from low socioeconomic backgrounds, backgrounds were parents were I'll equipped to parent their children correctly. Deprived children from underprivileged backgrounds. Backgrounds where they were forgotten & no-one really cared enough.
No-one ever said they were failed because of police attitudes to prostitutes.
That's your thoughts

Vic_08

bubblypop wrote: »

But the truth is the majority of the foreign girls working in the sex trade here were brought in, they were trafficked in.

You state that as a fact but how do you know? There just aren't the statistics or reliable facts available to put a number or % on it, you say majority but in reality you haven't a clue.

It fits the narrative you are telling so it probably is good enough that you just know the facts fit what you already believe them to.

Vic_08

bubblypop wrote: »

What?
You have just assumed that an attitude to prostitutes was the reason that police failed these girls!
There is no evidence of this whatsoever.
These girls were failed because they came from low socioeconomic backgrounds, backgrounds were parents were I'll equipped to parent their children correctly. Deprived children from underprivileged backgrounds. Backgrounds where they were forgotten & no-one really cared enough.
No-one ever said they were failed because of police attitudes to prostitutes.
That's your thoughts

It came up repeatedly in the reports and subsequent enquiries if you care to read them, or even just watch the documentaries or dramatisations of some of the events.

tea and coffee

Vic_08 wrote: »

You state that as a fact but how do you know? There just aren't the statistics or reliable facts available to put a number or % on it, you say majority but in reality you haven't a clue.

It fits the narrative you are telling so it probably is good enough that you just know the facts fit what you already believe them to.

https://www.rte.ie/amp/750325/

https://www.thejournal.ie/prostitution-4611526-Apr2019/

https://www.garda.ie/en/crime-prevention/crimecall-on-rte/crimecall-episodes/2019/april-29/purchase-of-sex-feature.html

No, there aren't reliable statistics but if you want to pretend sex trafficking isn't a massive issue, then that's because it fits _your_ narrative.

Castlekeeper

tea and coffee wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/amp/750325/

https://www.thejournal.ie/prostitution-4611526-Apr2019/

https://www.garda.ie/en/crime-prevention/crimecall-on-rte/crimecall-episodes/2019/april-29/purchase-of-sex-feature.html

No, there aren't reliable statistics but if you want to pretend sex trafficking isn't a massive issue, then that's because it fits _your_ narrative.

Trafficking aside, surely it's just another part of the pampering industry like spas, therapies, massage etc. and once due hygiene protocols are in place, is pretty harmless.

Vic_08

Vic_08 wrote: »

It came up repeatedly in the reports and subsequent enquiries if you care to read them, or even just watch the documentaries or dramatisations of some of the events.

I did. & I didn't see any link between prostitution & young girls being abused & raped & failed by the system

tea and coffee

Castlekeeper wrote: »

Trafficking aside, surely it's just another part of the pampering industry like spas, therapies, massage etc. and once due hygiene protocols are in place, is pretty harmless.

It is veey hard to see it "trafficking aside". There are a lot of trafficked persons working in forced prostitution, nail bars, as chefs etc.
I think you would think quite differently if it were you who were made work doing something against your will. It's precisely because it is seen as harmless and "I'm alright jack" that it prevails. I no longer frequent a local nail salon as I am aware of the large turnover of women that go through there on a very regular basis. I couldn't knowingly support that.

Still waters

tea and coffee wrote: »

It is veey hard to see it "trafficking aside". There are a lot of trafficked persons working in forced prostitution, nail bars, as chefs etc.
I think you would think quite differently if it were you who were made work doing something against your will. It's precisely because it is seen as harmless and "I'm alright jack" that it prevails. I no longer frequent a local nail salon as I am aware of the large turnover of women that go through there on a very regular basis. I couldn't knowingly support that.

Have you made your suspicions known to gardai, i know if i was frequenting places i had an inkling there was people trafficked working in the place I'd be straight onto relevant authorities, just because you stop going there doesn't magically make it disappear, they could look into it to make sure workers have the correct visas paperwork etc.

tea and coffee

Still waters wrote: »

Have you made your suspicions known to gardai, i know if i was frequenting places i had an inkling there was people trafficked working in the place I'd be straight onto relevant authorities, just because you stop going there doesn't magically make it disappear, they could look into it to make sure workers have the correct visas paperwork etc.

Yes I have. Another local place was raided for the same thing.

Still waters

tea and coffee wrote: »

Yes I have. Another local place was raided for the same thing.

And what was the result of the raid, any arrests or court cases out of it

tea and coffee

Still waters wrote: »

And what was the result of the raid, any arrests or court cases out of it

You'd have to ask An Garda Síochána about that. I'm neither a member of the police service, the DPP nor a journalist. It's my duty as a world citizen to do my bit, but I'm not bound to follow it around. They did close for a week, I know that much.
I think you just want an opportunity to say "ha tea and coffee, you don't give fiddlers, you didn't follow it up, you weren't down the cop shop banging on the counter".
If that is the case, whatever floats your boat.
I'm not running around patting myself on the back for the small bit I did, btw. No one person can solve everything- but if we all do a little, together we can achieve a great deal.

Still waters

tea and coffee wrote: »

You'd have to ask An Garda Síochána about that. I'm neither a member of the police service, the DPP nor a journalist. It's my duty as a world citizen to do my bit, but I'm not bound to follow it around.
I think you just want an opportunity to say "ha tea and coffee, you don't give fiddlers, you didn't follow it up, you weren't down the cop shop banging on the counter".
If that is the case, whatever floats your boat.
I'm not running around patting myself on the back for the small bit I did, btw. No one person can solve everything- but if we all do a little, together we can achieve a great deal.

You'd surely have seen news reports or heard it locally from others, it just leads me to believe that you're spoofing and you didn't report anything to anyone, i think you made it up to because i put you on the spot

Potential-Monke

From reading this thread, I think people are putting all sex workers into the same boat, ie: if they're in the sex trade, they're trafficked and not doing it by choice. Again, this is another one of those situations where in order to be truly neutral, you need to remove the emotion and deal with just the facts.

And it's a fact that some people (not just, but mostly women) are voluntarily in the sex trade because it's quite lucrative. It is unfair to put these people into the same boat as those who are trafficked. Not ignoring that trafficking does happen, as it does, but it's not all workers, and that's the important part.

The current situation is not helping anyone. The workers who are in it voluntarily now face jail time if caught, and the end-user faces the same, meanwhile (as pointed out) the organisers of the illegal side, the traffickers, get away scott free again. Like the 'war' on drugs, catching the end user or final line dealer won't make a slight bit of difference. Legalisation is the only way to start dealing with this. It would take a lot of work, but proper legaisaltion and oversight would improve conditions dramatically for those who choose to be in it.

KiKi III wrote: »

To me, the logical order to do things in is “get rid of the criminal gangs and then introduce legislation that protects sex workers and their customers”. Trying to do it the other way round doesn’t make sense.

If the Gardaí can’t tackle the gangs first, there’s no reason to believe they would after, so you’d just have a situation like you described in Germany where prostitution is legal but the gangs and exploitation still exist - basically the worst of all worlds.

Here's the problem; there are not enough Gardai to do everything. There's a priority, and people more learned than you or me decide on that. In order to effectively tackle gangland crime, we need a lot, lot more Gardai. If we want to tackle driving related offences better, we need more Gardai. Who decides which of these is more important?

The force is at about 10,500 iirc, in order to effectively police this state, I honestly believe we need at least 3 times as many, but no one will agree to that because you've seen on here how much the public love our police force (no, making all the current "lazy" guards work won't solve it, it's basically a numbers game).

Anyway, crime will always be a thing, it will never be eradicated, it can't be due to human nature. Making it illegal to buy or sell sex won't help anyone. Legalisation, proper oversight and continous support will help to reduce trafficking. It will never be eradicated, but we can reduce it as much as possible, and imo, keeping it illegal won't help (see: drugs).

tea and coffee

Still waters wrote: »

You'd surely have seen news reports or heard it locally from others, it just leads me to believe that you're spoofing and you didn't report anything to anyone, i think you made it up to because i put you on the spot

I reported Salon A. Salon B was the one that briefly closed down. I heard about that locally- Google doesn't throw up anything.
I'm not in the business of spoofing- seriously what would be the point of that? I can think of far better ways to make myself "look woke" if I was trying to do that, which I really am not. You can believe that if you want or not. You and I are both anonymous ( ish) people online so it's immaterial to me if you do or not.
That aside, we're straying wildly off topic here.

Edited: I found a link. https://fora.ie/nail-bars-employment-law-4025684-Jun2018/

tea and coffee

Potential-Monke wrote: »

The current situation is not helping anyone. The workers who are in it voluntarily now face jail time if caught, and the end-user faces the same, meanwhile (as pointed out) the organisers of the illegal side, the traffickers, get away scott free again. Like the 'war' on drugs, catching the end user or final line dealer won't make a slight bit of difference. Legalisation is the only way to start dealing with this. It would take a lot of work, but proper legaisaltion and oversight would improve conditions dramatically for those who choose to be in it.
.......
Anyway, crime will always be a thing, it will never be eradicated, it can't be due to human nature. Making it illegal to buy or sell sex won't help anyone. Legalisation, proper oversight and continous support will help to reduce trafficking. It will never be eradicated, but we can reduce it as much as possible, and imo, keeping it illegal won't help (see: drugs).

Just a small point on this- people who are prostitutes (unless they are operating a brothel) are no longer committing a crime since the enactment of the Criminal Law Sexual offences act 2017- those purchase are. (It used to be the other way around).

imme

Potential-Monke wrote: »

From reading this thread, I think people are putting all sex workers into the same boat, ie: if they're in the sex trade, they're trafficked and not doing it by choice. Again, this is another one of those situations where in order to be truly neutral, you need to remove the emotion and deal with just the facts.

And it's a fact that some people (not just, but mostly women) are voluntarily in the sex trade because it's quite lucrative. It is unfair to put these people into the same boat as those who are trafficked. Not ignoring that trafficking does happen, as it does, but it's not all workers, and that's the important part.

The current situation is not helping anyone. The workers who are in it voluntarily now face jail time if caught, and the end-user faces the same, meanwhile (as pointed out) the organisers of the illegal side, the traffickers, get away scott free again. Like the 'war' on drugs, catching the end user or final line dealer won't make a slight bit of difference. Legalisation is the only way to start dealing with this. It would take a lot of work, but proper legaisaltion and oversight would improve conditions dramatically for those who choose to be in it.



Here's the problem; there are not enough Gardai to do everything. There's a priority, and people more learned than you or me decide on that. In order to effectively tackle gangland crime, we need a lot, lot more Gardai. If we want to tackle driving related offences better, we need more Gardai. Who decides which of these is more important?

The force is at about 10,500 iirc, in order to effectively police this state, I honestly believe we need at least 3 times as many, but no one will agree to that because you've seen on here how much the public love our police force (no, making all the current "lazy" guards work won't solve it, it's basically a numbers game).

Anyway, crime will always be a thing, it will never be eradicated, it can't be due to human nature. Making it illegal to buy or sell sex won't help anyone. Legalisation, proper oversight and continous support will help to reduce trafficking. It will never be eradicated, but we can reduce it as much as possible, and imo, keeping it illegal won't help (see: drugs).

Prostitution is not some kind of career choice.

People are effectively forced into it.

Trafficked people form the vast majority. We should not be seeking to permit this, it run by nasty individuals and gangs.

The small minority who are not trafficked are forced by economic circumstances into selling themselves.

Prostitution is not some form of 'ultimate freedom' as some posters on Boards try to force on us.

The Sunday World has an expose in their Sunday 8 March 2020 that gives an insight into this 'glamarous business'.

Potential-Monke

imme wrote: »

Prostitution is not some kind of career choice.

See, people would be more inclined to agree with you if you didn't blanket the choice like this. Some people choose it. Until both sides agree that it is indeed a choice for some, we'll get nowhere and end up going around and around in circles.

Do you think the same about the porn industry? Surely no one would agree to have sex with strangers for money, so are all porn stars forced into it?

imme

Potential-Monke wrote: »

See, people would be more inclined to agree with you if you didn't blanket the choice like this. Some people choose it. Until both sides agree that it is indeed a choice for some, we'll get nowhere and end up going around and around in circles.

Do you think the same about the porn industry? Surely no one would agree to have sex with strangers for money, so are all porn stars forced into it?

If there were 4 people in Ireland excluding the American woman who gets an inordinate amount of airtime that chose prostitution I would be surprised.

Porn is a separate thing and should be kept to a separate thread.

Potential-Monke

imme wrote: »

If there were 4 people in Ireland excluding the American woman who gets an inordinate amount of airtime that chose prostitution I would be surprised.

Porn is a separate thing and should be kept to a separate thread.

You think those who choose would willingly come out and say it, when the reaction to prostitution is that no self respecting person would choose it?

I agree porn and prostitution are separate, but the only real difference between them is a camera. It's still sex for money. It's still being run by third parties who are profiting most. Just 1 is legal and the other isn't. You think the porn industry is all flowers and sunshine? It's not, but with proper legislation and enforcement, it's a lot safer than what it used to be.

Same can happen with prostitution, imo, if legalised.

KiKi III

Potential-Monke wrote: »

See, people would be more inclined to agree with you if you didn't blanket the choice like this. Some people choose it. Until both sides agree that it is indeed a choice for some, we'll get nowhere and end up going around and around in circles.

Do you think the same about the porn industry? Surely no one would agree to have sex with strangers for money, so are all porn stars forced into it?

I acknowledge that some women choose it.

The only women I know personally who have made that choice were recovering addicts in 12 step meetings who used prostitution to feed their habits before they got clean.

They were vulnerable women suffering serious mental health issues and while they “chose” to do what they did it’s still quite hard not to see it as them being exploited.

Manach

Nanny state scolding us to be good boys and girls. This is what happens when the government infuses itself with the belief it runs all aspects of people's lives and the private sphere disappears.

Allinall

AmberGold wrote: »

This morning shortly after 8am this ad came on the radio, I was driving my 12 year old daughter to school.

Can’t see the rationale for ads like this on the radio never mind the time they’re broadcast at.

What self respecting 12 year old is up at 8am on a Sunday?

mikhail

Allinall wrote: »

What self respecting 12 year old is up at 8am on a Sunday?

The post you quoted was made three days ago, a Thursday. :rolleyes:

anewme

imme wrote: »

The Sunday World has an expose in their Sunday 8 March 2020 that gives an insight into this 'glamarous business'.

I’ve just read that and it’s a tough read.

Potential-Monke

Ok, so we have acknowledgement that it can be a choice. And again, some who choose it are doing it to feed habits, etc. But there are still others who do it straight up for the money. High end escorts, as they like to call themselves, charging €500/hour for their company. Couple of hours work a week and earning more than most. Do it a couple of days a week for a few hours, you're minted. Some people (mainly women, but some men too) are able to have sex and it be just that, sex. No feelings, pure fake, an act, just like porno. If they're happy to do that, I'm all for anything that helps them do it safely.

The current way is not helping the people who are forced into it. It never will. Even if they start enforcing it more, it may reduce the amount involved, but it won't eradicate it. As seems to be the current trend, legalisation and oversight are the only ways to make it safe for everyone. Those who don't want to be in it will have avenues if it's not voluntary. Those who are in it for the money will be safer. But keeping it wholly illegal doesn't work. We* tried it with drugs, not working. We tried it alcohol, definitely didn't work. We're trying it with prostitution, doesn't appear to be working. I'm at a loss as to how keeping it illegal will benefit everyone, when so far it only appears to be getting worse?

Open to suggestions, but they have to be realistic, and expecting AGS to increase their numbers just for enforcement of this is a non-runner, it's not very high on the list of priorities in the face of other issues this country needs increased policing for.

KiKi III

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Ok, so we have acknowledgement that it can be a choice. And again, some who choose it are doing it to feed habits, etc. But there are still others who do it straight up for the money. High end escorts, as they like to call themselves, charging €500/hour for their company. Couple of hours work a week and earning more than most. Do it a couple of days a week for a few hours, you're minted. Some people (mainly women, but some men too) are able to have sex and it be just that, sex. No feelings, pure fake, an act, just like porno.

I believe that these types of prostitutes exist, but that they are a minority. Everything I’ve ever read about the industry suggests that sex trafficked women suffering brutal existences is far more common.

I think men like to believe that the first scenario is the most common one because it frees them of having to really think about the morality of what they’re likely doing.

(And before anyone gets confused again, I’m not talking about the morality of buying and selling sex, I’m saying it’s deeply immoral to pay for sex with a woman unless you are absolutely certain - and how would you be - that she is acting of her own free will and has not been trafficked)

BorneTobyWilde

In Brussels Sex Trafficking carries a huge sentence, but prostitution is perfectly legal. I think that is right approach, as it separates the reluctant partnership of Escorts to the Sex Traffickers and Pimps. It allows them to be legal, and to report the likes of Pimps and Traffickers. In Ireland sex traffickers and Pimps control prostitution for the most part. I think that is very wrong to put escorts in such a position, Escorts should ONLY be those who wish to do that work, so make that legal, and take all the power away from the sex traffickers and pimps. Free them from the clutches of those who seek to use them and abuse them for the return favour of protection and work.

KiKi III

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

In Brussels Sex Trafficking carries a huge sentence, but prostitution is perfectly legal. I think that is right approach, as it separates the reluctant partnership of Escorts to the Sex Traffickers and Pimps. It allows them to be legal, and to report the likes of Pimps and Traffickers. In Ireland sex traffickers and Pimps control prostitution for the most part. I think that is very wrong to put escorts in such a position, Escorts should ONLY be those who wish to do that work, so make that legal, and take all the power away from the sex traffickers and pimps. Free them from the clutches of those who seek to use them and abuse them for the return favour of protection and work.

Ummm... have you looked into how that’s working out in Belgium?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/535872/human-trafficking-for-sexual-exploitation-in-belgium/

Potential-Monke

KiKi III wrote: »

Ummm... have you looked into how that’s working out in Belgium?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/535872/human-trafficking-for-sexual-exploitation-in-belgium/

So, aside from 2013, it's been slowly dropping. And they have supports and citizenship available for those who are trafficked and report it. Probably like here, they don't have enough resources to put into while, while other areas of crime need those resources and have a higher rate of crime in that area (murder/manslaughter is nearly 3 times as rife in Belgium). It's a numbers game, but what Belgium have that we don't are proper supports for the victims.

Of course everyone likes to think what they're doing is legal, or the best way. I always thought the weed I was getting was good quality, because I'm friendly with the guy who supplies it. I know the chain, but yet my best friend (who goes to the same guy, mostly) is now in hospital with fibreglass in his lungs (suspected from the weed). So while (in other peoples heads) we're funding crime by choosing to smoke instead of poison ourselves, the product still being illegal is part of the cause of fibreglass getting into my friends lungs (he works in IT, never touches fibreglass in that role).

If weed was legal, well, maybe this wouldn't have happened. Actually, no maybe, definitely. Just like that, I think keeping it illegal is doing more damage and costing more money (he has private health insurance, but how many don't and we would have to foot the bill). I think legalisation and proper oversight with hefty sentences for traffickers is the only way to tackle this.

As Kiki said, people will trick themselves into thinking they've done it the right way, but while it's still illegal, it's impossible to say. And you're not going to get rid of it. People will pay to have sex, and will get it wherever they can. Legalisation would give a proper, safe avenue for both the worker and the punter imo.

KiKi III

Potential-Monke wrote: »

So, aside from 2013, it's been slowly dropping. And they have supports and citizenship available for those who are trafficked and report it. Probably like here, they don't have enough resources to put into while, while other areas of crime need those resources and have a higher rate of crime in that area (murder/manslaughter is nearly 3 times as rife in Belgium). It's a numbers game, but what Belgium have that we don't are proper supports for the victims.

Of course everyone likes to think what they're doing is legal, or the best way. I always thought the weed I was getting was good quality, because I'm friendly with the guy who supplies it. I know the chain, but yet my best friend (who goes to the same guy, mostly) is now in hospital with fibreglass in his lungs (suspected from the weed). So while (in other peoples heads) we're funding crime by choosing to smoke instead of poison ourselves, the product still being illegal is part of the cause of fibreglass getting into my friends lungs (he works in IT, never touches fibreglass in that role).

If weed was legal, well, maybe this wouldn't have happened. Actually, no maybe, definitely. Just like that, I think keeping it illegal is doing more damage and costing more money (he has private health insurance, but how many don't and we would have to foot the bill). I think legalisation and proper oversight with hefty sentences for traffickers is the only way to tackle this.

As Kiki said, people will trick themselves into thinking they've done it the right way, but while it's still illegal, it's impossible to say. And you're not going to get rid of it. People will pay to have sex, and will get it wherever they can. Legalisation would give a proper, safe avenue for both the worker and the punter imo.

There are some merits to your argument, but ultimately I think you have to weigh that against the normalisation of prostitution and whether that’s a good thing for the individuals and society in the long term.

I’m all for legalising weed, because you and your friend will then be able to make an ethical choice that will ultimately only impact you.

Prostitution will always impact the prostitute as well, and from what I’ve seen, not positively. I would rather we didn’t move in a direction of normalising the view that sex is a commodity to be bought and sold.

Will it happen anyway? Yes. Does that mean we should normalise it? I don’t think so.

We can and should still provide confidential supports to sex workers nonetheless.

sydthebeat

eviltwin wrote: »

Ruhama.

What did it say OP

I've heard that ad loads of times on the radio and to tell you the truth, I wouldn't have known who it was from until I read the above post.

whisky_galore

I'm damned if I'm taking lessons in morality from the same shower that ran the Magdelan Laundries.

Yurt2

Ruhama are a bunch of weirdos. Magdalene nun sponsored organisation staffed with National Womens Council types. They pretty much wrote the legislation for Frances Fitzgerald who was/is very pally pally with the latter set.

Potential-Monke

KiKi III wrote: »

Prostitution will always impact the prostitute as well, and from what I’ve seen, not positively. I would rather we didn’t move in a direction of normalising the view that sex is a commodity to be bought and sold.

Like yourself, I can see your points. And I'm a bit different to most, insofar as I keep my empathy for those close to me, and really couldn't care less about anyone or anything outside of my circle (I cared about too much for too long to the detriment of my mental health, so i've done a complete 180 and trying this out).

Anyway, I can't see why sex can't be a commodity like anything else. it already is, in the form of porn. Just that prostitution is that step further. Basically the same as porn, but different, and would be even closer to porn, imo, with legalisation and oversight. I've no doubt the evils of this world will still try and control it, but it should be extremely hard with oversight and legislation.

Not having a go, just wondering, but do you have an issue with 'happy ending' masseuses? How about the masseuse who rubs their naked body over yours, but don't do anything else/you can't do anything but lie there. Is it only the actual act of intercourse and fellatio/cunnilingus/actual use of sexual organs? How about the sex workers who do BDSM and don't actually have sex, but would be naked/domineering over the male?

LaFuton

this isnt helping

BorneTobyWilde

KiKi III wrote: »

Ummm... have you looked into how that’s working out in Belgium?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/535872/human-trafficking-for-sexual-exploitation-in-belgium/

They seem low? Thought they'd be in the thousands

KiKi III

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

They seem low? Thought they'd be in the thousands

You expected thousands of cases of sex trafficking in the system you’re advocating for Ireland?

And you don’t seem at all phased by the thousands of women who have been trafficked into Brussels in the last few years?

Do you not see how messed up that sounds?

KiKi III

Potential-Monke wrote: »

Like yourself, I can see your points. And I'm a bit different to most, insofar as I keep my empathy for those close to me, and really couldn't care less about anyone or anything outside of my circle (I cared about too much for too long to the detriment of my mental health, so i've done a complete 180 and trying this out).

Anyway, I can't see why sex can't be a commodity like anything else. it already is, in the form of porn. Just that prostitution is that step further. Basically the same as porn, but different, and would be even closer to porn, imo, with legalisation and oversight. I've no doubt the evils of this world will still try and control it, but it should be extremely hard with oversight and legislation.

Not having a go, just wondering, but do you have an issue with 'happy ending' masseuses? How about the masseuse who rubs their naked body over yours, but don't do anything else/you can't do anything but lie there. Is it only the actual act of intercourse and fellatio/cunnilingus/actual use of sexual organs? How about the sex workers who do BDSM and don't actually have sex, but would be naked/domineering over the male?

Ah look there’s a lot of grey areas and I’m not going to go into “In situation X I think Y but in situation A I think B”.

I have a general view that seems supported by the facts that prostitution as an industry is based on the trafficking and exploitation of sex workers, primarily women.

Since the examples we’re being given like Brussels where it’s legal still show that thousands of women are being exploited, I’m struggling to see how it’s a model to emulate.

If we could show that legalisation reduced sex trafficking dramatically, I’d reconsider my view, but I haven’t seen any evidence that that’s the case so far.

Potential-Monke

Ok, I've read a small bit on it, and you are correct insofar in high-income countries legalisation has resulted in an increase of trafficking, but also legalisation is needed to protect those who willingly work in the industry. In my quick research, I've found a survey by the University of Leeds of sex workers who like their job, and even find it rewarding and fun, and have previous employments in healthcare and have third level qualifications.They believe making it illegal, even in the Swedish model, will leave them open to abuse/assault. So it seems a lot more needs to be done in this sector, and a simple 'Make it il/legal' won't resolve this.

https://essl.leeds.ac.uk/sociology/article/637/survey-by-dr-teela-sanders-reveals-previous-professions-of-sex-workers