Pickman's model
sunset spires and twilight woods
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/oct/20/government-trafficking-enquiry-fails
fucking hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of pounds down the drain to prove what i suspected.
sex trafficking? what sex trafficking?
- Thread starter Pickman's model
- Start date
- Status
fucking hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of pounds down the drain to prove what i suspected.
London_Calling
Pleasant and unpatronising
That's really good investigative journalism by The Guardian. Well bloody done.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
Grauniad said:
The fact that they've not been able to find any traffickers doesn't of course mean that it's not happening. I suspect finding victims of the trade that will speak out is quite difficult - in fear of retaliation by organised trafficking gangs, worried about being deported, etc.
from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/oct/20/sex-trafficking-inquiry-nick-davies:
agricola
a genuine importer of owls
An odd article this.
For a start, even the Guardian in that article acknowledge that it does go on and that people have been convicted of it in the past (indeed, they have reported it themselves in the past). However, in highlighting the link between the political pressure on the police and government (as the result of the proposed change in the law, discussed on Urban here), they do make a valuable point and one that deserves to be highlighted, especially as the incredibly dangerous bill in question is still making its way through the legislative process.
For a start, even the Guardian in that article acknowledge that it does go on and that people have been convicted of it in the past (indeed, they have reported it themselves in the past). However, in highlighting the link between the political pressure on the police and government (as the result of the proposed change in the law, discussed on Urban here), they do make a valuable point and one that deserves to be highlighted, especially as the incredibly dangerous bill in question is still making its way through the legislative process.
The boy who cried wolf or should I say the bogus statistics apologist who cried trafficked sex slaves.
Fullyplumped
in a personal capacity
Are there people here saying that there aren't any women and girls who have been brought in to this country and then forced into servitude to be sex workers? All credit to the Guardian for this reporting, and it is good news, but the glee with which some people are using this to attack a Labour government which has made serious efforts to tackle what we now know might well be a less serious problem than was originally thought is a bit sickening.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
This.
It reminds me of the comments so often made on the Daily Fail where regardless of the subject, somebody always likes to make it into an attack on the Labour Government.
Very lazy indeed.
If the figures can be trusted, then it may be that the problems of sex trafficking might not be as bad as thought, but there seems to be a hell of a lot of charities and refuge's taking in women that are trying to escape sex trafficking. For that reason, I'm dubious just to accept that because a Grauniad investigation hasn't uncovered anything conclusive in figures, then it somehow isn't happening.
trabuquera
Modesty Bag
chaps, surely the hint is in the original story:
"The UK's biggest ever investigation of sex trafficking failed to find a single person who had forced anybody into prostitution ". Note that it DOES NOT say "failed to find anyone who had been forced into prostitution."
UK Government using shaky evidence in grandstanding speeches to the media and misspending too much money on an investigation? Of course - that's business as usual, and might be grounds to get indignant if you're gratified by that sort of thing. But "no detected traffickers yet" most certainly does not equal "no trafficked women in the UK".
There are, ooooh, about a million reasons why even 'the biggest single investigation' would not actually result in any traffickers being busted - no, not even one - and those reasons include mortal fear on the part of the trafficked, use of fake identities, insulating layers of 'management' between trafficking 'kingpins' and trafficked women, problems in evidence, corruption in countries of origin, poor communication between welfare workers, the police, the CPS, etc.
"The UK's biggest ever investigation of sex trafficking failed to find a single person who had forced anybody into prostitution ". Note that it DOES NOT say "failed to find anyone who had been forced into prostitution."
UK Government using shaky evidence in grandstanding speeches to the media and misspending too much money on an investigation? Of course - that's business as usual, and might be grounds to get indignant if you're gratified by that sort of thing. But "no detected traffickers yet" most certainly does not equal "no trafficked women in the UK".
There are, ooooh, about a million reasons why even 'the biggest single investigation' would not actually result in any traffickers being busted - no, not even one - and those reasons include mortal fear on the part of the trafficked, use of fake identities, insulating layers of 'management' between trafficking 'kingpins' and trafficked women, problems in evidence, corruption in countries of origin, poor communication between welfare workers, the police, the CPS, etc.
untethered
For industry & decency
If the government were serious about curbing prostition they'd take a zero-tolerance approach and lock up everyone involved: the prostitutes, their clients, the pimps, the landlords, the newspapers, websites and other places that carry their advertising.
Of course they're not really that bothered, which is why they're happy for the country to continue to be a moral sewer.
Of course they're not really that bothered, which is why they're happy for the country to continue to be a moral sewer.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
Mr Moose
What the hell are we supposed to tell the kids?
I agree with the sensible people in the middle of this thread.
59 convictions suggests a problem worthy of attention and that's just the apex of the levels of coercion and exploitation associated with prostitution. Thank god its not any bigger.
I totally agree its no reason to enact law that penalises prostitutes.
There is though in my mind something immoral in paying to have sex with someone, who for whatever reason, drugs, poverty, trafficking, presents dubious consent. That's not gone away and I'm not sure that many prostitutes are outside of that list.
59 convictions suggests a problem worthy of attention and that's just the apex of the levels of coercion and exploitation associated with prostitution. Thank god its not any bigger.
I totally agree its no reason to enact law that penalises prostitutes.
There is though in my mind something immoral in paying to have sex with someone, who for whatever reason, drugs, poverty, trafficking, presents dubious consent. That's not gone away and I'm not sure that many prostitutes are outside of that list.
untethered
For industry & decency
It's reasonable to think that someone who persistently defies social conventions regarding the nature of sex and relationships is "marginalising" themselves.
Here's an idea: Why don't people stop selling and buying sex?
mentalchik
"I say we take off and nuke the site from orbit."
And just point to an era in human history when they haven't ?
Mr Moose
What the hell are we supposed to tell the kids?
Yes why don't they!
But why stop there? Can't people just stop doing anything that's wrong!
It's so unfair and plain wrong.
untethered
For industry & decency
Point to an era in human history when the government has been serious about stopping it.
But your point is a dismal one anyway. We should oppose things that are wrong rather than wring our hands and accept that it will always happen.
Frankly, every prostitute and every client sitting in a prison cell is a victory for decent society.
untethered
For industry & decency
Alternatively you could engage with the point in a sensible fashion.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
By whose 'social conventions'?
And what would you consider as being included/exempt when you refer to the 'nature of sex and relationships'?
untethered
For industry & decency
Do you buy or sell sex? Who else here does?
We're talking about prostitution. If you want to address other aspects of human sexual behaviour perhaps you could start threads about them.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
No to the first point, although you've not answered my question:
By whose 'social conventions'?
I'm not bothered about other aspects of human sexual behaviour, it was YOU that made the somewhat intriguing comment, so hence I asked you about it.
What do you think will be achieved by trying to lock up women sex working? Many of those that are co-erced by pimps and gangs. Do you see these women as criminals by default?
Mr Moose
What the hell are we supposed to tell the kids?
When you do I will.
Sure people don't lose their moral responsibility when they become prostitutes, but it must be a long, long road to get there that perhaps you'd have to travel to really understand. Whatever the right approach is locking them up isn't it.
Save your ire for the men that use them.
untethered
For industry & decency
Isn't the answer to that in the definition of those words?
It'll stop them doing it, oddly enough.
That should be decided in each individual case. Substantial coercion could be a statutory defence. It's not something that should argue against the principle of criminalising prostitution.
dylans
overlord of all acorns
How anti trafficking laws are used to criminalise and abuse Cambodian Sex Workers.
Video by Cambodian sex workers
http://www.channels.com/episodes/show/3402318/No-Exit-News-MTV-and-the-trafficking-law-in-Cambodia
Video by Cambodian sex workers
http://www.channels.com/episodes/show/3402318/No-Exit-News-MTV-and-the-trafficking-law-in-Cambodia
untethered
For industry & decency
I'll direct my ire at everyone that's letting the side down. People that choose to become prostitutes deserve just as much ire as their clients and should be treated equally harshly.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
Will it? What are often the root causes of those entering into sex work? Purely to make a lot of money or chosen lifestyle? Hardly.
I'm intrigued that you think that criminalising prostitution should be focused around criminalising those caught up in it? (the sex workers).
Criminalising those who try and buy sex, and those who try and co-erce women into selling it are the ones that should be criminalised, in my personal view. Sex workers often need support and alternatives, not being banged up and further criminalised. It'll probably lead them back onto the street again.
Mr Moose
What the hell are we supposed to tell the kids?
Frame that and look at it again in 10 years time when you've grown up.
stethoscope
Well-Known Member
Well, I think there's little point in discussing with you.
'Letting the side down' - who's side?! Are there sides?
I don't see many convincing arguments.
I have been ridiculed and vilified on Urban for my take on "trafficking" (and prostitution in general).
I am pro-choice on prostitution and completely anti-trafficking - the vast, vast majority of which is for general, unskilled labour.
And I have argued forever that the genuine trafficking of unwilling people into prostitution is miniscule.
In this case, after many months of the intensive, focussed and coordinated work of 55 different police forces accross the UK, thousands of raids and over 500 arrests ..... of the fifteen convictions secured for "trafficking", ten were based on the (weird UK,) law that allows convictions for "trafficking", where the prostitutes involved were willing conspiritors in their "trafficking".
Wake up!
There's nothing wrong with prostitution, nor with those who choose to engage in it, despite the "moral panic" that surrounds it - it's an old and (generally) honourable profession - and the "moral panic" around "people trafficking" should be focussed where it's needed; trafficking cheap labour.
The policy emphasis must be upon protecting and supporting sex workers and not upon seeking demons where few lurk.
Yes, people trafficking is vile, but most is about cheap labour - very few people need to be genuinely "trafficked" into prostitution, the monetary rewards are sufficient to ensure a vast and willing influx of participants.
And the idea that someone can be convicted of "trafficking" when all the supposedly "trafficked" people are complicit in the crime seems like insanity to me.
It's moralistic nonsense of the worst sort. Trying to pass legislation to curb supposedly "immoral" behaviour conducted between/among consenting adults is insane, much like putting people in jail for up to five years for simple possession of small amounts of cannabis, while 9,000+ die in the UK each year directly from overindulging in alcohol (and that is "direct", not including drink driving or alcohol related violence).
"Trafficking" related to prostitution is a miniscule problem, particularly when compared with people trafficked into the general job market. Intimidation and volence are rife in the real trafficking arena and yet everyone seems to ignore this and focus on prostitution.
I believe this is driven by a moralistic agenda and is in danger of trivialising and distracting attention from the very genuine trafficking that does occur.
The vast, vast, VAST majority of prostitutes have chosen this work because it is far, far, FAR more lucrative than anything else they can do. We should let them get on with it, support them, and focus "trafficking" enforcement efforts on those many tens of thousands of genuinelly trafficked workers who are forced, against their will, into hard labour for little more than thruppence a day.
Talk about missing the point!
Woof
I am pro-choice on prostitution and completely anti-trafficking - the vast, vast majority of which is for general, unskilled labour.
And I have argued forever that the genuine trafficking of unwilling people into prostitution is miniscule.
In this case, after many months of the intensive, focussed and coordinated work of 55 different police forces accross the UK, thousands of raids and over 500 arrests ..... of the fifteen convictions secured for "trafficking", ten were based on the (weird UK,) law that allows convictions for "trafficking", where the prostitutes involved were willing conspiritors in their "trafficking".
Wake up!
There's nothing wrong with prostitution, nor with those who choose to engage in it, despite the "moral panic" that surrounds it - it's an old and (generally) honourable profession - and the "moral panic" around "people trafficking" should be focussed where it's needed; trafficking cheap labour.
The policy emphasis must be upon protecting and supporting sex workers and not upon seeking demons where few lurk.
Yes, people trafficking is vile, but most is about cheap labour - very few people need to be genuinely "trafficked" into prostitution, the monetary rewards are sufficient to ensure a vast and willing influx of participants.
And the idea that someone can be convicted of "trafficking" when all the supposedly "trafficked" people are complicit in the crime seems like insanity to me.
It's moralistic nonsense of the worst sort. Trying to pass legislation to curb supposedly "immoral" behaviour conducted between/among consenting adults is insane, much like putting people in jail for up to five years for simple possession of small amounts of cannabis, while 9,000+ die in the UK each year directly from overindulging in alcohol (and that is "direct", not including drink driving or alcohol related violence).
"Trafficking" related to prostitution is a miniscule problem, particularly when compared with people trafficked into the general job market. Intimidation and volence are rife in the real trafficking arena and yet everyone seems to ignore this and focus on prostitution.
I believe this is driven by a moralistic agenda and is in danger of trivialising and distracting attention from the very genuine trafficking that does occur.
The vast, vast, VAST majority of prostitutes have chosen this work because it is far, far, FAR more lucrative than anything else they can do. We should let them get on with it, support them, and focus "trafficking" enforcement efforts on those many tens of thousands of genuinelly trafficked workers who are forced, against their will, into hard labour for little more than thruppence a day.
Talk about missing the point!
Woof
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
