The future of sex work in Ireland - due for debate/review in Dail Eireann

bo0li5eumx12kp

2017 law criminalizing purchase of sexual services in Ireland due for review/renewal, matter to be discussed in Dail Eireann.

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/WBJTF3B

As I understand it, survey initiated by Helen McEntee by way of Department for Justice.

Law was introduced under Francis Fitzgerald, remained in place under the tenure of Charlie Flanagan, and now Helen Mac having taken that position, is due for review.

A topic that's historically received much opposition from various "factions", let's say.
Much of which is comprised essentially of religious'esque associated organizations so, to be expected.

....

Ludicrous as this comparison may sound, Eamon Ryan is heavily invested in revolutionizing Dublin's cycle infrastructure with a primary agenda being, traffic restructuring, introduction of individual cycle lanes for cyclist safety and sense of well being whilst traversing heavily trafficked roads.

Sex work isn't that different.

It's an industry prone to volatile temperaments and in many respects, needs to be treated with care and attention, given the investment and oversight it requires, not simply regarded as something peripheral, insignificant in the grand infrastructure - cause all it takes is one idiot and next thing BOOM - a horrible tragedy has transpired.

Department of Justice, their goal is to ensure worker safety, preclusion of exploitation and forced labour - and one thing I liked about the 2017 law is that, it brought attention to the matter;

A historically suppressed/ignored practice, suddenly it was cultural topic, televised debates, live radio conversations etc.

Essentially to continue in that vein, that level of attention and investment, not necessarily a continuation of that law itself - but as oppose to "traffic restructuring" (sorely needed) as the Department of Transport is concerned with, a "Cultural restructuring" that government legitimization of such a practice would enable.

....

Naturally with this level state input and oversight, licensure etc, would be an exponentially more effective means of addressing exploitation and malpractice in the trade than the "close your eyes, cover your ears and hope it goes away" tact that's been historically employed.
Neither that nor "stand idly by and let the chips fall where they may"; state investment and active participation to me, can be the only direction that will facilitate true sustainability and safety in the trade.

What a huge historical cultural hurdle that would be to jump, however.

JasonStatham

Should remain criminalized.

EmmetSpiceland

Take her up to Monto, Monto, Monto...

jaxxx

JasonStatham wrote: »

Should remain criminalized.

Ignorance of the highest order. Since this law was introduced, violence against sex workers has increased dramatically. But no, according to you that's ok cos it should remain criminalised. Or were you even aware of that? People, like you, who don't do any sort of research into this kind of thing coming out with blanket opinions based on nothing but what you're spoon fed. The reality is that human trafficking and those that choose sex work (and yes, there are those that do choose to it; and no, they're not all addicted to drugs or riddled with STI's, despite what you bigots believe) are not one in the same thing. Yes they're related, but they are themselves distinct from one another. One involves consent. The other slavery. But there are people that are so stuck in their own ways that they refuse to listen to any that has the audacity to differ from their own "bible".

What's really so different about 2 consenting adults having sex for money vs 2 randomers meeting in a club and having a one night stand?

Eric Cartman

JasonStatham wrote: »

Should remain criminalized.

The seller should be penalised, legalising or softening punishments on prostitutes just encourages human trafficking.

jaxxx

Eric Cartman wrote: »

The seller should be penalised, legalising or softening punishments on prostitutes just encourages human trafficking.

Ok. Where are your facts to base this on? I'm genuinely intrigued as I enjoy reading up on many different types of issues in the world.

Eric Cartman

jaxxx wrote: »

Ok. Where are your facts to base this on? I'm genuinely intrigued as I enjoy reading up on many different types of issues in the world.

https://orgs.law.harvard.edu/lids/2014/06/12/does-legalized-prostitution-increase-human-trafficking/

Countries with legalized prostitution are associated with higher human trafficking inflows than countries where prostitution is prohibited. The scale effect of legalizing prostitution, i.e. expansion of the market, outweighs the substitution effect, where legal sex workers are favored over illegal workers. On average, countries with legalized prostitution report a greater incidence of human trafficking inflows.

bo0li5eumx12kp

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Take her up to Monto, Monto, Monto...

lol see that was the problem with monto right there.

Insufficient state oversight, lack of regulation, standards, and almost certainly not tax compliant.

Some sex-work/prostitution free for all.... defeats its own purpose, and of course leaves vulnerability for the bottom feeders to creep in and wreak havoc - which as surely as mud flows downhill, they will do.

Coordination - I mean the entire purpose of upmarket society is glamour.

High end clothes, shoes, make up stores, high end nightclubs and venues - it's all glamour.

That's the purpose - gets the people going!.

As a means to what ends?

....

Yeah, getting your rocks off.

So why would the industry put in place specifically to get one's rocks off, be anything less than glamorous?

And left to some exclusively decentralized exploitationists that never went to college, it's bound to be trashy.

Just like monto was.

And all trashy things must come to an end.

#sustainability

bo0li5eumx12kp

Eric Cartman wrote: »

https://orgs.law.harvard.edu/lids/2014/06/12/does-legalized-prostitution-increase-human-trafficking/

These "studies" are typically grotesquely unreliable, highly biased, skewed, whatever you want to call it.

It's like a study conducted by the company that's selling the product, they'll paint it in whatever light suits their own ends the best.

dotsman

Should be perfectly legal and regulated.

Prohibition does not work, nor has it ever worked. Nobody has every been able to successfully argue for its criminalisation. The fact that we only treated the symptoms, but not the cause of the Magdalene Laundries means we are going to be very embarrassed when we explain to our children/grandchildren how we let this happen.

In an ideal society, all those who push for criminalisation should be criminalised themselves. They are the bullies; the oppressors; the right-wing cúnts who get off on other people's misery. They are the ones we want marginalised and ostracised from society, not people who have sex in a different way to "the norm". It is they who represent all that is wrong and evil in society.

It's just sex. The sooner we learn to keep out of other adult's sex lives, the better for everyone.

bo0li5eumx12kp

We'd be on page 6 if this was kept in AH.

Current affairs is to formal for this discussion - it doesn't fit the "culture" around here.

Can we move this back to AH where it was originally posted?

Rodney Bathgate

Are escorts legal here?

Pkiernan

The overwhelming majority of these poor women are being raped daily by multiple punters.

The customers should be charged with rape .
The pimps should be face trafficking and slavery charges.

bo0li5eumx12kp

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

Are escorts legal here?

It's not a licensured trade no.

i.e. somewhat of a free for all.

It's legal status depends on the whims of a select few but the point being, in its current incarnation, legality is less of a consideration than actual functionality of practice on a whole.

A throwback to "monto" is not the way forward.

The oppressors like to keep it in the gutter though - they feel less threatened by it there.

bo0li5eumx12kp

Pkiernan wrote: »

The overwhelming majority of these poor women are being raped daily by multiple punters.

The customers should be charged with rape .
The pimps should be face trafficking and slavery charges.

i.e. volatile/temperamental trade.

Some people need to believe what's in the quotation box.

The reality to them is just too infuriating to acknowledge.

So these myths get conjured up, whilst exploitationists stand to profit amidst the confusion.
The latter is where the Irish policy makers are accountable.

I don't see decriminalization in and of itself making much difference.

Criminalize, don't criminalize - the river runs its course regardless.

The cultural impact of state recognition of this as legitimate work however, subsequent facilitation, codes of practice, etc etc - that's the thermonuclear device under historical oppression.



Every corner of society it would reach.
Every sensibility it would touch.

What two consenting adults get up to is no business of the State.

Man with broke phone

Pkiernan wrote: »

The overwhelming majority of these poor women are being raped daily by multiple punters.

The customers should be charged with rape .
The pimps should be face trafficking and slavery charges.

Woah, just wow. Should probably arrest all the people watching women being raped in porn too. One time I seen a man leave a fancy restaurant with his fiance, they were very touchy feely looked like they were going home to initiate rape. I did nothing to stop it. Im just as bad as the human traffickers.

bo0li5eumx12kp

Deleted User wrote: »

What two consenting adults get up to is no business of the State.

I get your point but technically, if they're operating a business, it is.

I'm not contradicting your sentiments on the matter, I'm merely highlighting that an increase in state intervention as a means of facilitation, is what needs to happen;

1) it needs to happen to address the trafficking/coercion concern

2) it needs to happen to ameliorate a hypocritical national mindset gone skew ways

Man with broke phone

Marlowe Old Quadriplegic wrote: »

I get your point but technically, if they're operating a business, it is.

I'm not contradicting your sentiments on the matter, I'm merely highlighting that an increase in state intervention as a means of facilitation, is what needs to happen;

1) it needs to happen to address the trafficking/coercion concern

2) it needs to happen to ameliorate a hypocritical national mindset gone skew ways

How about its legal but only for women who have been living in their county for the last five years.

Bards

If kids are going to be allowed to change their gender at 16 then sex between consenting adults is not a crime and should not be criminalised

bo0li5eumx12kp

Man with broke phone wrote: »

How about its legal but only for women who have been living in their county for the last five years.

That means gals who want to get into it, given illegality of that setup - would be forced to turn to pimps and traffickers to begin work.

KiKi III

Bards wrote: »

If kids are going to be allowed to change their gender at 16 then sex between consenting adults is not a crime and should not be criminalised

Sex between consenting adults is just called sex.

Prostitution is not the same thing.

CrabRevolution

Man with broke phone wrote: »

Woah, just wow. Should probably arrest all the people watching women being raped in porn too. One time I seen a man leave a fancy restaurant with his fiance, they were very touchy feely looked like they were going home to initiate rape. I did nothing to stop it. Im just as bad as the human traffickers.

The last thread on this topic had a poster with a similar style. They provided no information or argument other than employing very emotive and graphic language about involuntary prostitutes. Whenever they were refuted or given a counterpoint their only retort was to effectively repost what they'd previously said but this time include even more graphic words.

bo0li5eumx12kp

Bards wrote: »

If kids are going to be allowed to change their gender at 16 then sex between consenting adults is not a crime and should not be criminalised

I agree, but contend that what it requires is not decriminalization exclusively, but additionally, state input.

I'm not talking about putting it up in lights and on the corner of every street.

It's always going to be clandestined as, it's hardly a spectator sport.

Just like any other business has government measures and protocols, standards to meet and codes upon which to practice.

StringerBell

Legalise it, regulate it, tax it.

i_surge

KiKi III wrote: »

Sex between consenting adults is just called sex.

Prostitution is not the same thing.

You need to qualify your statement for accuracy. Most of it consenting as you well know.

I guess listen to the people involved. Most in that industry want it legitimised for their safety.

There is trafficking but it is a side issue, your approach may help them but harms the majority to help the minority, tricky to find the right balance.

Status quo doesn't work for many reasons.

Kylta

Deleted User wrote: »

What two consenting adults get up to is no business of the State.

Technically it is if money changes hand and the state doesn't get its revenue.

My opinion it should've been legalised years ago, it offers the sellers a certain amount of protection in regards to assaults and safe sex practises. It will also give the buyer the knowledge that his transaction is getting done in a safe place. And wants the state recieves its taxes the these places can become legalised and under the protection of the state in regards to security measures.
I would rather see a legalised form of prostitution that whats happening with the sex trade where women/men mostly children are being force to sell their bodies to make some scumbag rich

i_surge

StringerBell wrote: »

Legalise it, regulate it, tax it.

Yes maybe but close it down right now and put them on a covid payment for the public good.

Brushing the activity under carpet is a disaster for virus containment.

Pkiernan

[Deleted User] wrote: »

What two consenting adults get up to is no business of the State.

Trafficked women have no choice but to consent.

bo0li5eumx12kp

KiKi III wrote: »

Sex between consenting adults is just called sex.

Prostitution is not the same thing.

.....

Is this where the lay persons understanding falls down?

....

Quid-pro-quo fren.

Quid-pro-quo.

Perhaps slightly off topic but, every try and get laid without offering something in return?
Companionships, security, status (aka popularity, depending on the environment) etc?

The hustle never ends just, some gals (refer to themselves as "feminists"), they despise the fact that their leverage can be alleviated, and sex work enables said alleviation.

....

Thus my general contention that legitimization is a bombshell to conventional societal framework.

Forces it to rethink itself, simply the fact that such a model would be endorsed by the higher powers.

jaxxx

Pkiernan wrote: »

Trafficked women have no choice but to consent.

.. .. .. I've read some ignorance in this thread put this takes the f*cking biscuit. It's disgustingly offensive to victims of human trafficking. That is LITERALLY not consent.