General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWoman offers sex for two double cheeseburgers, deputies say
MANATEE A woman was arrested in a prostitution sting on 14th Street West but not before she got two double cheeseburgers off the dollar menu at a McDonalds restaurant.
The Bradenton Herald reports that Christine Faith Baker, 47, was walking north in the 6300 block of 14th Street West on Friday when she was approached by a detective working in the Manatee County Sheriff Offices special investigations division, according to a Sheriffs Office report. After the undercover detective invited Baker into his car and the talk turned to sex, she said her fee would be two double cheeseburgers from the dollar menu at McDonalds, the report states.
http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/bizarre/content/woman-offers-sex-two-double-cheeseburgers-deputies-say
RagAss
(13,832 posts)FACE IT .....We are fucked as a country !
Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)TheWraith
(24,331 posts)"Stupid," "hungry," and "low standards" are all pretty good hallmarks.
sudopod
(5,019 posts):/
emilyg
(22,742 posts)Typical NYC Lib
(182 posts)Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)OneTenthofOnePercent
(6,268 posts)just sayin...
Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)maundy thursday
(4 posts)Javaman
(62,504 posts)or are you now the chief of the ethics and moral police?
JVS
(61,935 posts)It is extremely likely that there are other problems here than just hunger.
cali
(114,904 posts)drugs, alcohol, MI or something.
PassingFair
(22,434 posts)How DARE you!
vaberella
(24,634 posts)She's willing to give up her body for $2.00 that's serious.
Sarah Ibarruri
(21,043 posts)MrScorpio
(73,630 posts)She was facing hunger.
This, my friends, is a sure sign of what a downward economy does to women.
XanaDUer
(12,939 posts)That poster of women voting GOP is like chickens voting for KFC comes to mind. So so sad. Edit typo
msongs
(67,367 posts)TheWraith
(24,331 posts)I would agree that this was entrapment (or at least, a wrongful charge) if the woman had actually offered sex for the burgers, since that could indicate that she was merely drunk, high, hitting on the cop and getting a meal out of it, etcetera, but the rest of the article clearly states that she also told him he could "tip" her $40 for it. If he had offered her the money first, that would be entrapment; if she offers, it's not.
JonLP24
(29,322 posts)entice you to commit a crime you normally wouldn't commit. One example I can think of is offering to buy a small amount of drugs for way above market value.
aikoaiko
(34,163 posts)She's got to eat.
siligut
(12,272 posts)I hope she did too. She was released in the morning.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)PCIntern
(25,491 posts)and she HATES these remarks in general...
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)geeezus fuckin....
ohheckyeah
(9,314 posts)met his arrest quota for the week. We couldn't have that.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)A few years ago, it was a very hot topic and every media outlet did the best it could to make their story the most sensational.
It was called "Breezer sex", after the alcoholic beverage by Bacardi which then was very popular among high school teenagers (legal drinking age over here is 16). Researchers discovered that there was a substantial (?) amount of teen girls who offered sex in exchange for a Breezer drink. Or a pack of cigarettes. Or a hamburger. Things like that.
For a little while, so many similar (anecdotal) stories came out, it seemed like an epidemic under teenage youth. Worried sociologists, panicky feminists and moral crusaders were quick to condemn porn, the sexual revolution, tv programs about sex targeting teens etc. as the reasons for this "moral bankruptcy of today's youth". Later, it turned out to be a small portion of all high school teenagers who engaged in this kind of behavior. The scale was much smaller than the alarmists would have us believe. After a while, the hype died down and nobody has heard any report on it since.
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)davidthegnome
(2,983 posts)First off, we have the victim, (yes, I said victim) a woman who is very hungry and can't afford food. Next, we have a so called "undercover detective" with nothing better to do than attempt to entice her into sex for reward, in this particular instance, two double cheeseburgers. She is then charged with prostitution, spends time in jail. All because she was desperate for food. It's beyond sick. Why not help her out instead? Offer to take her to a homeless shelter if she needs it, take her to the local DHHS so she can apply for food stamps? Hell, I'd have bought her the cheeseburgers for nothing... dollar menu - two bucks and some change. She also said he could tip her 40 dollars.... insane, the whole thing is just sick and sad.
Isn't there something more important the "detective" and the "agents" could have been doing? Like, I don't know, maybe chasing down major drug dealers, violent gangsters pimps who use and abuse these women and leave them with very little.... ugh.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)clearly she chose her choice and that's feminist so you need to stop oppressing her and instead advocate for legalized prostitution. That way she can exchange sex for food and not have to worry about being arrested for it. See? Problem solved.
Forget about those silly leftist ideas about not forcing people into situations where they'd make such choices. That's only for sweatshop laborers. When the sex trade is the issue we're libertarian, all the way.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)There was a lady at a pool hall I go to once in a while who wanted a ride to a friends house to grab some more pills, oxy, whatever she had to have. She was offering blow job on the way over. So we were in the back playing pool chuckling at the poor schmucks she was trying to get a ride from, a few bucks got thrown together and the bartender gave it to her to take a bus.
Not every single little story out there is about the patriarchal oppression smashing down on ones head
Yeah, time to exit this thread. Ugh.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)Pool hall on Coit Road south of GWB about 1 mile....
What's the WOW for?
zappaman
(20,606 posts)you guys helped her out with the money she needed instead of giving her a lecture about how sex is bad and how dumb she is for not knowing she was being oppressed.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)Son of Gob
(1,502 posts)sudopod
(5,019 posts)This thread just makes me sick to my stomach.
Do you suppose this country is in a downward cultural spiral, or has it always been this callous and full of bile?
Response to sudopod (Reply #135)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
sudopod
(5,019 posts)You haven't noticed the growing, frightening meanness of "society"? Have you been listening to what the majority party in the House has been proposing with regard to destroying the social safety net? Fully half of US voters seem to think that's just a swell idea. Have you noticed the exponential growth in hate groups in the last three years, or how as a nation that we've decided that it's OK to torture people, to bomb them via remote control, even though dozens of innocents die for every successful target? How we're murdering the earth in order to squeeze one or two more decades of "normality" from the fossil fuel economy, and no one gives a damn? How ignorance is prized higher than learning, faith more than reason, punishment more than mercy?
Do I need to play the "let him die!" video for you? That's the political mainstream. Can you honestly say that's an improvement from 25 years ago?
None of this is rational, nor is it sustainable.
There's something deeply ugly happening in the core of this nation. This thread is a fine example.
As for the rest of the world, there are peoples and nations moving in the opposite direction. On average, yes, the state of global humanity is improving. Unfortunately, we seem to be hitting a local minimum.
Maybe you're just being contrary for the hell of it. In which case, one can only shrug and move on.
Response to sudopod (Reply #155)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Well, congratulations for already hijacking yet another thread with your obsession to always play the victim.
OTOH, there's not much honor in it for you here, because really, how hard is it to argue against things that were never said in the thread in the first place?
NOWHERE in this thread! Nowhere.
Ooooh, but you are sooooo smart and sooooo clever. Yes, pat yourself on the back again for being so righteous and pure and for fighting the good fight.... even if said fight is not the topic of the thread. Drag in your obsessions to hijack the thread. Why stay with the topic if you can also use it to further your own agenda, your crusade against legal prostitution?
sudopod
(5,019 posts)How dare she?
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"hijacking yet another thread with your obsession to always play the victim..."
I believe you're conflating standing up for strong feminist ideals with an "obsession to always play the victim...".
"Drag in your obsessions to hijack the thread...."
Also I believe you're discounting a rather valid point with direct relevance to the OP simply because you either disagree with it or do not understand it
However, I do realize many people minimize and trivialize those concepts and convictions we either do not, or simply refuse to understand, and become very petulant when confronted with them...
Scout
(8,624 posts)some posters are obsessed with the strong feminists who post on this board ... they always seem to show up in the same threads, and they delight in calling us "pious" and "prude" and "sex-negative" and they "wonder" about our psyches, and if we are jealous of "pretty" women....
you seem to have this one pegged!
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Redqueen builds up her own strawmen, just so she can attack them and tear them down. She attributes these strawmen to (not specifically mentioned) fellow DU members, thereby implying that her self-invented strawmen bear any resemblance to opinions shared on DU. Thus, all her post does is position herself as a pure and holy defender of virtue and morality. It's nothing but virtual masturbation. It's nothing but her congratulating herself with how smart she supposedly is.
And by the way, I don't consider turning all women who do something that you don't agree with into powerless victims a very feminist thing to do. Pointing out the abuse and the coercion and the human trafficking and standing up against that, THAT is a feminist thing to do. But lumping conscious, self-aware, strong women who have made a lifestyle decision that you don't agree with, in with the victims and belittling them by condescendingly telling them they don't know what's good for them... NOT a feminist thing to do.
sudopod
(5,019 posts)As an outside observer who is unfamiliar with your histories, this looks like childish stalking and taunting more than anything.
"...condescendingly telling them they don't know what's good for them."
wat?
moriah
(8,311 posts)I prefer the idea of criminalizing paying for sex, not criminalizing *being* paid for sex. When I was trying to find where my little brother and sister's biological mom got off to after she abandoned them, I found references to multiple arrests for prostitution -- she has severe alcohol and drug problems. Arresting her isn't doing much good. Arrest the johns.
But I'm a strange person.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Your proposal is like the Dutch drugs policy: you can use it, own it and sell it. You just can't grow it. That's illegal. (How all those coffeeshops get their weeds, nobody seems to know.)
I see comparisons to your approach to prostitution. Either you outlaw both paying for it AND being paid for it, OR you legalize both. But not criminalize one and not the other. Makes no sense at all.
If you legalize it, the women won't be criminally charged anymore. Isn't that a better solution?
redqueen
(115,103 posts)is now often referred to as the Nordic model. It started in Sweden and has since been adopted by Norway, Denmark, and now France. It has made a huge impact, not only by making those countries unattractive to sex traffickers, but also by changing public opinion about the acceptability of the idea of buying sex.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Then again, I dont believe in criminalizing things where two consenting adults do something in private.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)My guess is that there is more to this story than meets the eye.
Turbineguy
(37,295 posts)Ruin somebody's life, get a promotion.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Major Nikon
(36,818 posts)Beacool
(30,247 posts)This is the kind of behavior that occurs in times of war. It happened in Europe during and after WWII, in Iraq, etc.
Looking at her mug shot, she might be a drug addict. The woman is more deserving of pity than jail time. Well, at least she'll get a bed and 3 square meals for a few days.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)bluedigger
(17,086 posts)A War on the Poor.
Yay, Police State.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)redqueen
(115,103 posts)They're always out hooking for drug money.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)Always a good question.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)Sure it is.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)"it should be legal", etc.
Response to Snake Alchemist (Reply #28)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)So prostitution was perfectly legal everywhere until those two showed up in the '80s? That's odd. I read that both focused their efforts on criminalizing pornography, not prostitution.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)Is in Sweden and Norway and Denmark and France. So far, anyway. It will keep going.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)because when they go there, they will be criminally charged.
And I'm sure the human traffickers and abusive pimps don't mind being away from the public light. They can exploit girls much more easily when the police has no oversight of their 'business'.
So yay for more unhealthy, unsafe and abusive working conditions with no chance of escaping for prostitutes in these feminists paradises! Because if we pretend it's not there, it doesn't exist! That is, in the minds of radical feminists whose primal concern is their own high morals instead of protecting women. They don't really care about that; it's just about being morally superior.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)about the Nordic method of dealing with the problem of sex buyers.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)And how is France a 'nordic country'? Or all the other countries where prostitution is illegal and sex workers face the conditions I described?
Here in The Netherlands, the city council of Amsterdam is doing everything it can to drive away as many sex workers from the 'red light district' as possible. The city wants to make that part of Amsterdam more 'classy' by denying renewals of licenses for prostitutes. When their windows are emptied out, they invite artists and designers in to 'diversify' the neighborhood. All this is done, the city says, to push back human trafficking of mostly Eastern-European girls who were brought here under false pretenses and are forced into prostitution. A noble goal, certainly, but all it does is moving the problem from that district, where it's visible, for all to see, into other neighborhoods, where the prostitutes will wind up on the streets, in the illegal circuit, with no access to the health workers and the organizations that work to get women out of the business that are there in the red light district. So the approach of the Amsterdam city council won't eradicate abuse and human trafficking, it will simply relocate it and push it into illegality where it's much harder to control it. But, at least it SEEMS like there is much less forced prostitution; it LOOKS like there is less human trafficking. We just pretend it is gone, so it MUST be gone!
Same reasoning as you use in your posts. The urge to make themselves look morally superior has more priority than actually doing what's best for these women.
But prostitution is not only women behind windows. It's also women working in fancy brothels. I've seen one from the inside. Girls working there (please don't throw a fit over the word 'girls'!) have protection, make their own rules, decide their own prices, have hygiene, safe working conditions etc. These women are in control. But we can't say that. according to you, because every woman that makes a decision about her own body that you don't agree with, must be a poor deluded victim who has to be guided the way to enlightenment by you.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)I'm still not sure how facing jail time over $40 and two cheeseburgers is liberating and pro-woman, but decent working conditions and healthcare are anti-feminist. It boggles my mind and always has.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Even when it's about consenting adults, some people will stay say they're not "really" consenting, because they are deluded or tricked by 'the patriarchy'; or they were abused or mistreated in their childhood (thus supposedly rendering them incapable of making any decision of their own for the rest of their lives); or they are only doing it for the money (as opposed to waitresses, who do what they do because it's their hobby) etc. Basically, a prostitute can't make her own decisions, according to these people... and then they accuse *others* of denigrating women.
Sometimes, it's like you're in the Twilight Zone.
Those girls working in that brothel I know are lucky this business is legalized in The Netherlands. They are protected by the law; they have legal rights they can claim; whenever they get in trouble, they can go to the police without fearing arrest; they work at places that have to abide by strict hygienic and safety standards; they have a right to social security when they get out of work etc. Most of these girls are working for themselves, by the way. They're not 'under contract' with the (female) brothel-owner. They pay a part of their income to the owner to use the rooms and facilities, but they're their own boss and can pack their bags and leave whenever they please.
A feminist's worst nightmare.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)I worked in an area where it wasn't legal, and know how bad it can really get. I envy your workers their conditions, even now with them under attack.
And yes, I've been called all of the above.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Oh, I know what you mean; still thought it was funny. (I'll LOL at everything.)
I'm not romanticizing the business. For lots of girls, it IS hard. I'm not pretending human trafficking and forced prostitution ISN'T going on in Amsterdam's red light district and similar areas in The Netherlands where 'window shopping' for prostitution is the norm. I just don't see how that problem is solved by pretending it isn't there anymore.
But then again, I don't know why there's still such a thing as the 'red light district'. I mean, I don't get why a guy would want to wade through masses of other men and tourists to get to a 18 year old Polish girl who doesn't speak a word of Dutch and who will only 'serve' you for 20 minutes in a small room that's barely big enough to turn yourself around, while the noise of the drunken, yelling passers-by continue endlessly in the background.
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)That settled that.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)I guess English isn't your first language so whatever. They have criminalized buying sex. If Amsterdam would do that they'd see the same changes that have taken place in those places where traffickers do not find it profitable to do business. It's pretty simple. Not sure why you wrote a small book about the miserable failure Amsterdam is experiencing. It's legal there and the place has serious problems with illegal, trafficked prostitutes. If legalization is such a marvelous idea why are there still such problems with underground prostitution there?
Face it, the criminalization of sex buying is the most sane and successful method of protecting some of society's most vulnerable women and children. You and others can pretend that legal prostitution would help them somehow but reality is there in Amsterdam for everyone to see. The fact that its a multi billion dollar industry means they will he harder to stop than sweatshops, but it will happen eventually no matter how hard however many people try to ignore that reality.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)That's why I wrote that "book", you know, otherwise known as slightly longer post. But if that's too much for your attention span, I could be briefer. I just thought I'd provide you with some information. Too bad you didn't take away the most important thing from it, being that your desired approach to prostitution doesn't work. Simply by pretending prostitution isn't there anymore (like the city council of Amsterdam is doing now), doesn't mean it has gone away. By denying licenses to window patrons for prostitution doesn't mean people with bad intentions are going: "well, let's throw in the towel now and quit this business altogether". That's wishful thinking.
You really can't grasp the fact that, had it not been legalized, that there would have been much more illegal, underground prostitution? Don't you see that by legalizing it, victims of human trafficking have access to police, health workers and organizations that help women to get out, without having to fear criminal charges? Don't you see that legalization makes it easier for health workers to make contact with these women to make sure they're working in hygienic conditions and are protected from diseases and stuff? A few years ago, a network of human traffickers which was operating in the red light district was broken up by the police. They said they couldn't have gathered enough information about it to arrest those responsible had this network been operating underground in the illegal circuit.
Can't you see that or is that too nuanced for you, because it isn't the sharp black-and-white contradiction that you're so eager to use?
You don't have an exclusive claim to "reality". As evidenced by your dismissal of my "book", you have a very limited view of reality. You want to prescribe to others how to see reality and when they don't agree with you... well, then they must be ignorant. Is that a good summary of your posts? I think so. That includes the sex workers, by the way, the women have made a conscience choice to work in this business and whom you belittle by denying them their own choices. Because they're not as enlightened as you are...
How does it make sense to criminalize buying sex, but not offering sex for money? Whenever a man wants to pay for sex, there has to be someone offering it, otherwise there is no deal. So the deal involves two people. Why then should only one party face punishment? Oh, yes, I forgot, because he's a MAN! Never mind the woman who made it possible for the man to do what he did (offering money for sex). Just punish one party. Doesn't make sense, but it'll make YOU feel good.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)make your points more concisely. I didn't read all if that of course.
Suffice it to say that your belief that a worsening trafficking issue where its legal, compared to an improving trafficking situation where the Nordic model is used somehow indicates that legalization is in any way helpful defies logic. I can only suppose that you choose to believe the propaganda aimed at enabling this incredibly abusive, multi billion dollar industry to continue to flourish.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)I write elaborate replies, because I thought you actually cared about this topic. But now it has become painfully clear that you don't. If you even have trouble with a somewhat longer post; if your attention span is too short for that, that means you don't really care about the topic. The question then is: why are you here at all? Not to discuss. Just to play your broken record over and over. So stop wasting our time.
You obviously have no answer to all the arguments I made above or you would have given them. You didn't. So buh-bye now.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)Yes boss, whatever you say boss.
I care about the topic, not verbose recitals of misinformation.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Now, THAT'S lol!
That, AND your misplaced sarcasm.
You don't care about the topic, otherwise you would've made an effort to reply properly instead of stooping to childish responses like these.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)There is a difference between the two.
Amsterdam, where its legal - huge problem with traffickers.
Nordic countries, not so much.
And with that I'm done engaging with you. Have fun defending the poor helpless multi billion dollar sex industry.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)So obviously you didn't even read about Amsterdam and that explains your warped view of the situation there. I said it before, this is what cognitive dissonance looks like: you purposefully shut out facts and stories that don't fit your narrow agenda. All that's left is a Pavlovian reflex and the same broken record. Have fun with that!
zappaman
(20,606 posts)redqueen
(115,103 posts)I read enough or I'd have no idea what you said. Christ. See why this is a waste of time?
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Well I guess being half informed is better than not being informed at all.
You're like Sean Hannity who cuts off a tape of Obama speeching halfway through and then gets mad at what he said, leaving out everything else he said, which would have painted a whole different picture.
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)....about access to health care and safety is something she has nothing for.
JNelson6563
(28,151 posts)I find your first hand account/experience/observations on the matter to be interesting and enlightening. Thanks for taking the time to post them.
Julie
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)What I find troubling, is that I'm being seen by some in this thread as a defender of all the wrong, illegal and amoral aspects that can be a part of prostitution, just because I want to give a more nuanced, less biased view of it. With some people, it's always "either-or": either you agree with me, or you are an amoral bastard who doesn't give a damn.
The fact remains that prostitution in The Netherlands, where it has been legal since 2000, knows many forms. I think many opponents in this thread simply can't form an image of prostitution other than what they know from their own surroundings: crack addicts or impoverish (underage) girls walking the streets, getting in cars with men, having unprotected sex for maybe a lousy $50, after which they may have to give up half to their pimps. I'm against that, too; I think I made that very clear. Legalization hasn't cured all ills. There is still human trafficking, often from Eastern Europe, and coercion still exists. I acknowledged that. But still, the opponents pretend that I don't. They know I did; it just doesn't fit their agenda, because if they recognize that I acknowledged and condemned those abuses, they can't paint a black-and-white picture anymore and then they would have to really THINK about what they say, instead of giving a Pavlovian reaction and put on their broken records.
Like I said, prostitution knows many forms in The Netherlands. My estimation is that coercion and human trafficking happen mostly in what we call 'red light districts' (like the one in Amsterdam, but you'll find them in multiple big cities in my country), where girls in their lingerie are posing in front of windows to the (hoards of) men who pass by. They work in very small rooms, close to each other. They usually have a man in and out in 20 minutes for an average rate of 60, though the older ones usually charge less (they have fewer clients). Most of these girls are from Poland, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria etc. and they often speak very little to no Dutch. They often have a pimp or a so-called 'loverboy' ('boyfriends' who, at first, persuade a girl with expensive gifts and later talks her into prostitution to 'help him pay his debts') to whom they pay a large part of their share. Police and the Department of Justice says large parts (though not all) of this 'window industry' is run by people whom they suspect of being involved in criminal activities. But because this business is legal, police has a better grip on controlling what's going on and breaking up criminal networks, which would be much harder to do when these networks were forced into the illegal circuit.
Then there are the escort services and the brothels. I don't know much about escort services and the girls who work in that branch. It works like this: escort services advertise in the papers, on the internet or on tv (regular cable tv) and then people can call and 'order' a girl at home (or at a hotel room or wherever). The girls working in brothels (or 'private clubs' as they're often called) are their own boss, most of the times. They pay a part of what they make to the owner, often a woman herself, to pay for the rooms and facilities they're using. I don't know that there is any human trafficking or coercion involved here, despite claims of opponents in this thread who'll say that every prostitute is always a victim (but that's their ideology). Whenever these girls don't want to work at a certain place anymore, they pack up their stuff and go and seek a better working environment. The vast majority of these women, in my estimation, are native Dutch. Most of the times, a brothel charges a fixed rate for usage of a room (rate depends on the amount of time you want to spend there) and all girls at one brothel charge the same rate for their services, again depending on the amount of time. Some brothels allow all girls to set their own rates independent of each other. Girls decide for themselves whether or not they want to give 'extra services' and everything extra is charged separately. Like, some girls don't do oral sex without a condom; some don't do anal sex etc. Some girls include French kissing in the standard rate, others don't, still others don't want to kiss at all because they find it too intimate. That's all their own choice. Their rooms are big and a bit luxurious sometimes and they have a washbasin and/or a bath for personal hygiene. Some brothels seem to have a bar or 'lounge area' of some kind where men can socialize with a woman first, but those seem to be the more expensive clubs.
So that's a whole different thing from what most people might think of when they hear the word 'prostitution'.
Simply stated, I think two consenting adults should be allowed to do whatever they want to do. And I'm not going to be so absolutely arrogant to belittle a grown woman by telling her I know what's best for her and I know she made a wrong decision.
I hope I didn't make this "book" too long.
Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)I don't care about the definition of "Nordic" but I'd be interested in a quick summary of the best current method of dealing with the problem of sex buyers.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)Jim Lane
(11,175 posts)It consists mainly of detailing adverse consequences of prostitution and of the decriminalization approach. About all it says about the "Nordic" alternative is:
It does seem a little odd to say that a particular transaction is illegal for one of the parties but not the other. Offhand I can't think of any analogies in current American law except for actions involving children -- which echoes the criticism of some in this thread who argue that prohibiting women from selling sex, for their own good, is overly paternalistic.
That we don't have anything like it now doesn't mean that it's a bad idea, but it does leave me curious as to how it works out in practice.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)It is working so well that France recently adopted it. There is plenty of information on the net if you're curious. Keep in mind that there is a LOT of money at stake, so just as with the global warming 'debate' you have to be aware of the possibility of those who stand to lose the most money attempting to muddy the waters. It is sad that money trumps the planet and human lives to some.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,271 posts)Lawmakers from the commission were expected to introduce a bill later Tuesday or in the next few days to criminalise paying for sex.
The commission has recommended imposing sentences of up to six months in prison and a 3,000 euro ($4,000) fine on clients of prostitutes.
...
Punishing clients will "deprive prostitutes of work that provides them with a living, give clients more power over them and push prostitutes to turn to intermediaries to be able to work," said Sarah-Marie Maffesoli, a lawyer for sex workers' group Strass.
http://www.france24.com/en/20111207-france-moves-outlaw-prostitution-french-lawmakers-fines-jail-paying-sex-abolition
It is, as far as I can tell, still just a proposal: http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/13/propositions/pion4057.asp
redqueen
(115,103 posts)Under New Law, France Would No Longer Be Sexual Playground of Men Like Dominique Strauss-Kahn
(snip)
The Nordic model does not penalize the persons in prostitution, but makes resources available to them. Instead, it targets and exposes the anonymous perpetrators - the buyers, mostly men, who purchase mainly women and children for sexual services. The key to the law's effectiveness lies not so much in penalizing the men, but in removing the invisibility of the buyers and making their crimes public. Men fear being outed as prostitution users.
Criminalizing demand works. Police report that it becomes less profitable for pimps and traffickers to set up shop in countries where their customers fear the loss of their anonymity. Less profit means less prostitution and less violence against women.
If this law holding prostitution users accountable for their commercial sexual exploitation passes, France will be the first country on the Continent to penalize the demand for prostitution. Parliament has set the groundwork for a future vote on the proposal after the French elections.
Since the French parliamentary resolution, several sex clubs in Paris have been shuttered following allegations of pimping. The most prominent club closure was Les Chandelles. Regarded as the most exclusive of the 50 so-called Parisian "swingers" clubs - club échangiste in French - Les Chandelles appears to have been an upscale brothel with "highly organized" pimping and prostitution on the premises. Pimps recruit and provide women to the club's well-heeled men. After a long investigation, the police closed down the club on December 23, 2011.
(snip)
If Parliament passes the law penalizing the buyers, men like DSK will face legal accountability. In the meantime, France has already declared that as a country it does not support a legal system where prostitution flourishes as a normal business, where pimps are transformed into third-party business agents and where brothel owners are decriminalized as legitimate sex entrepreneurs. This France is definitely NOT the sexual playground of Dominique Strauss-Kahn.
I expect it won't be long till they take the next step. I wonder which country will be next to evolve.
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Constitutionally. Seems pretty unfair on its face. Hey Jim, I have something I want to sell you! You decide you want to buy, boom, you are arrested and I walk away. Regardless of what 'it' is, drugs, sex, political pamphlets, instructions on how to build weapons, its unfair.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)I posted a couple of links there on the Swedish model. I'm on my tablet and roaming right now, but pretty sure I've got others if you need. There's a dispute about effectiveness, but all actual evidence points to the law being a failure in practice.
Response to KamaAina (Reply #42)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)I'm just not sure what Dworkin, MacKinnon, or feminism had to do with it.
Response to KamaAina (Reply #53)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)I could've said "stirring up the shit", of course, but you never know whether or not the 'S-word' would get it alerted.
Response to DutchLiberal (Reply #88)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
DisgustipatedinCA
(12,530 posts)(reference #1: my own troubles today. reference #2: trumad's deleted post to Will Pitt....just in case anyone thought I was serious, and since I've never bothered to find the sarcasm tag)
Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #96)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)Response to zappaman (Reply #99)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)Did you not get the pony you wanted?
Response to zappaman (Reply #117)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)I'm sure there's someone out there who'd be much happier if she'd run into a serial killer than a cop, because that would make it sooo much easier to push their agenda- but hey, I guess slapping her in jail- for cheeseburgers and $40- will work in a pinch. What a country we live in...
Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #64)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)I have GOT to learn to wait until the first rush of bitterness fades before hitting the Post button.
I know damn well they don't care- about her or anyone like her. We're pawns in a very sick agenda. If we won't assimilate and become monogamous or chaste, they prefer us dead. Dead whor-sex pozis don't talk back, and it makes for a much nicer headline.
Meanwhile, let's all ignore the fact that this woman obviously needed both money and food AND WE'RE JAILING HER FOR IT, and pretend it's all about the insult to radfem.
Excuse me. I need to go spit the angry taste from my mouth. Back later.
Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #76)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
JVS
(61,935 posts)Maybe not the best form of intervention, but better than continuing on her path.
Response to JVS (Reply #69)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)For consenting adults.
Usual Brigade checking in ...
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)Response to Snake Alchemist (Reply #46)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)Response to Snake Alchemist (Reply #59)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)Response to Snake Alchemist (Reply #74)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)Even if legalized, I don't think it will stop the ones who want to trade for 2 hamburgers off the dollar menu and may have other problems.
Response to Snake Alchemist (Reply #80)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)and love to be prostitutes.
Response to Snake Alchemist (Reply #83)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)But that's because they have access to health care, safe working conditions, hygiene etc. You know, all those things prostitutes in the US don't have because you're "empowering" them by criminalizing them.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)I would much rather criminalize the johns than these girls though.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Neat. Very feminist, belitteling women like that.
Why criminalizing those who pay for sex, but not the ones being paid? It's either legalize both or legalize neither. Legalize one but not the other doesn't make any sense. (Except for satisfying your desire to lay the burden entirely on men.)
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Imagine being forced to take therapy when you don't want any! So far for women's own choices, eh? That's all fine until they make a choice YOU don't support. Then they have to be FORCED to do something they don't want to do.
And tell me, when exactly are these women "cured" and "ready" to be a prostitute? When are YOU going to give THEM back THEIR free choice? Whenever the psychiatrist says so? Or whenever you say so?
In your authoritarian dictatorship, will women still be allowed to have non-paid sex? Or can't they do that either because they have been abused in the past? Will they be forced to undergo therapy as well? And if not, why not? Why then could a woman have meaningless sex with huge numbers of men she doesn't know, as long as she doesn't get paid for it, but she can't when she does get paid for it?
I hope you now realize how ridiculous your argument sounds, because you can't really draw the line anywhere without being arbitrarely and lead by your own personal preferences, and that you don't have any right to tell any woman how to live her own life. Oh, and that it's condescending, demeaning, patronizing and belitteling to women.
But you're doing it in the name of 'feminism', so that must make it right.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)Less women dancing in clear high heels.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)You are IN FAVOR of robbing women of their free choice. Less women doing that icky sex stuff that offends your pure thoughts so much.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)And never mind that it isn't your call to decide what woman is "damaged" and what woman is not. Just go on pretending you are the supreme judge of assessing a woman's mind and her capability to make a choice.
The arrogance is un-fucking-believable.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Not something for you to decide.
Response to Snake Alchemist (Reply #173)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)Illegal everywhere in the U.S. but the Nevada brothels.
How's that working out for ya?
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)but they disappeared under Roosevelt. They're back now in different forms.
I think sex shouldn't be "work". And I'm pretty confident that without the economic incentive (or disincentives in the form of the lousy pay and conditions in about half the jobs going), it wouldn't be, for the most part.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)What, you think most people enjoy their jobs? Most people work because it generates money. Some are lucky enough to have a job they really like.
I've seen a documentary on Dutch public tv the other week about Amsterdam's new approach to their 'red light district'. One of the people who appeared in it, was a twenty-something prostitute who said she had gone to college and got her degree and was offered a good job, but she declined and would rather work in prostitution because a) she made more money that way and b) she enjoyed having sex a lot. Now I'm not saying this goes for every prostitute (or even a majority), but to view ALL of them as victims goes way too far.
You say you think sex "shouldn't be" work. But why shouldn't it be?
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)rather be doing something else for a regular job, all else being equal. And I'm including trafficked women in that statement. I think there is a certain kind of man that *wants* to think prostitutes like it, and a certain kind of man who *wants* to think they don't.
I will go with my own experience of overdoing on the question of "likes to have sex a lot". There is no way that would be enjoyable, for any woman, unless she was able to set the terms. Not if she had to take all takers on a daily basis. Too much sugar make you nauseous.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)You can't say "it's my opinion that the majority of prostitutes would rather be doing something else", because you are stating something like it is a fact. You can say: "it's my opinion that prostitution should be illegal". That expresses a wish, based on an opinion. But you can't present an opinion as fact, like you did above. That's just not possible.
Are YOU going to tell that woman that she doesn't know what she does or doesn't find enjoyable? Are YOU going to tell her that YOU have decided what she should or shouldn't enjoy?
And again, I'm not saying that goes for all prostitutes, or even a majority, but it does happen. And that's not wishful thinking. But for most of them, it's a job like any other job. I have nothing but the highest respect for them. I could never do what they do.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)there are men that it gags you to sleep with. Not sexy. And that is true for all women, regardless of how much they like sex. They may do it for money or power or position, but they're not liking it.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)And women should set their own rules and their own working times. I think most of them do that and are able to do that. At least where I'm living. I've heard of women refusing clients because they were unhygienic, for instance. (I don't understand why a man wouldn't wash up before he visits a prostitute. I mean, just because you pay for sex doesn't mean she has to put up with everything!)
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)even chose to be prostitutes in any reasoned way. They were trafficked, they were in the milieu, they were addicts, they were poor, etc.
Aline Wuornos is as representative of prostitution as your call girls that pick and chose their clients.
You can't be that picky when you're making under $50 for a trick and having to pay bail bonds and pimps.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Last edited Thu Apr 5, 2012, 12:36 PM - Edit history (1)
what moron is going to claim it is about liking sex or being horney.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Good for you to call other women nasty names! How feminist of you! That will certainly empower them!
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)doing what she wants....
WHERE did i call any woman a name. i am talking the fools that say prostitutes are just horney and really like sex.
you know, men in an illusion that tell themselves this so they feel like what they are getting is really cause the women thinks all that about getting his dick in her mouth. a complete stranger. 20 x's a night. as opposed to the reality of what a woman will do to survive.
and no, i wont go back and forth in your petty arguing style i see thru out this thread.
but ya.... the women that do this to survive, really, it is just cause she cant get enough. keep telling yourself that.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)You go tell that woman she is a moron for making her own decisions. She could have landed a good job with her college degree, yet she decided to go into prostitution. Be a real 'feminist' and tell her she's too stupid to chose something you don't agree with.
If my posting style bothers you so much, then feel free to ignore me. Saves me the trouble of going through your incoherent and misspelled ramblings.
... and you just keep telling yourself that everybody hates sex as much as you do. Maybe if you repeat it often enough, it'll become reality.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)You don't want to differentiate between those who were forced and those who willingly and knowingly chose to do it. The latter category doesn't exist in your view, because they don't fit your agenda. All prostitutes *have* to be victims. You *want* them all to be victims, because otherwise they don't fit your narrow point of view anymore. We call that 'cognitive dissonance'. That's why you say "blah blah" to every point of view that doesn't match yours --not really an indictaor of someone who is open to discussion.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)next time, read the story, not just the headline.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)she could buy food for the week and have dinner that night to boot. Of course, I understand jail is so much better of an option. That criminal record won't harm her future prospects one bit, or affect her ability to rent an apartment, or anything negative like that.
wait for it,
wait for it,
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)impossible.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)You sure you're on the right website? Because this one is not meant for conservatives.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)A lot of men like to overlook the issues these women have faced because lets face it, they like to watch them dance.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)But thanks for playing.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)nt
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)... to make decisions.
You can try to cover it up in your fake cloack of decency, but there's nothing noble or decent about taking away womens' free will --at all.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)Feel free to respond here.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002521227
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Character assassination is easy. Reading what I actually write, think about it, then form a nuanced opinion and respond to it in a non-black-and-white nature... that's obviously a little harder.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)What? Walking While Poor?
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)Jail is not the way to fix that. Neither is involuntary treatment. Readily available, voluntary treatment is the only thing that will help.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)neither the business owner nor the customers are under duress normally.
There would be a lot fewer people like this woman if it was legal. Because if customers want to buy a service, no one forces them to do so. The business has a profit incentive, no one forces a person to go into business.
But as it is now, yes, at least one side often is under duress, the prostitutes who are forced to work for pimps. The best way to eliminate that, is to make it legal.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)I have a feeling she is not an escort, but more likely someone who buys a lot of cough medicine in bulk.
Response to Snake Alchemist (Reply #60)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)Meth addicts tend to not be too cooperative though. Make the best housekeepers though according to one who employed one.
Response to Snake Alchemist (Reply #82)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)Response to Snake Alchemist (Reply #108)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)me that she is poor. I have been asked outside the Supermarket for money for food by homeless people and they go to the Burger King to buy it. Some people are just hungry. I wish she would have just stopped someone but I guess she didn't feel anyone would give her food for nothing.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)My friend had one cleaning her house for a short period of time. The rates she charged were unbelievably low and the house was never cleaner. She would clean for 16 hours straight and it was like the house had been sanitized. All that manic energy I suppose.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Kingofalldems
(38,425 posts)Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)Upton
(9,709 posts)at their chosen occupation because you think you know what's best for them..is definitely an example of RW thinking...or anti sex radical feminist thinking. It's difficult to tell the difference anymore.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)Response to Snake Alchemist (Reply #104)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)kids. Showing my age I guess.
Response to Snake Alchemist (Reply #186)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)....in fact just the opposite.
But if you want to believe they do because making up shit about their argument is easier to attack than the reality, feel free.
bluedigger
(17,086 posts)They actually are well off and support their habit through their day jobs.
Snake Alchemist
(3,318 posts)10$ for this flat screen TV, 5$ for this bluray player,etc.
Response to Tony_FLADEM (Original post)
Initech This message was self-deleted by its author.
sudopod
(5,019 posts)JVS
(61,935 posts)Don't listen to them. You're beautiful, Randy.
TheMightyFavog
(13,770 posts)"Ten bucks or two Dairy Queen coupons"
Erose999
(5,624 posts)bart95
(488 posts)if she had any self respect
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)Evasporque
(2,133 posts)slampoet
(5,032 posts)AnnieBW
(10,413 posts)But I'm not gonna go there.
Justice wanted
(2,657 posts)is desperation.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)Headline is misleading.
Justice wanted
(2,657 posts)Cleita
(75,480 posts)I once upon a time read some Victorian porn and the Lord who wrote about his exploits with the London ladies of the night, wrote about a young woman selling herself for a loaf of bread because she was too thin from starvation to get a better price.
flvegan
(64,406 posts)I don't think this is what meth looks like, but I'm no expert. Might be a newish user? Maybe just really hungry. Her occupation portion of her arrest page is blank...
Cleita
(75,480 posts)closed mouth? Also, she seems very young.
flvegan
(64,406 posts)Like I said, all I've ever seen are the extreme "Don't Do Meth or You'll Look Like This" ads.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)I know what she looks like.
Puregonzo1188
(1,948 posts)Catherine Vincent
(34,486 posts)She has either lost her mind or was just hungry. It reminds me of that movie "Playing for Time" where this jewish girl sold her body just to eat.
sudopod
(5,019 posts)sudopod
(5,019 posts)This woman is mentally ill, destitute, or both. She offered to trade sex for food and enough money to get by for a day or so. That's god damn hilarious, isn't it?
What kind of sociopathic misfit thinks this is funny? Is this who we really are?
redqueen
(115,103 posts)on the issue of the sex industry. Psychologists must be ignored and only happy hookers matter. Anyone who is abused, trafficked addicted, exploited, etc... is on their own. The fact that many sex buyers want underaged prostitutes or prostitutes.who are desperate enough to subject themselves to abuse is just brushed aside. Apparently only happy hookers (however many of those there actually are) and of course the all important sex buyers are worthy of consideration. Somehow some people think that women like this would magically become healthy and live successful lives, if they could only legally compete with escorts.
sudopod
(5,019 posts)where no one is so poor that prostitution for a hamburger seems like a good idea.
We live in an age of marvels. There is no excuse for this to still be happening in the year Two-Thousand Twelve. Why aren't people asking questions about this? Why aren't people getting mad?
Response to redqueen (Reply #138)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
sudopod
(5,019 posts)Response to sudopod (Reply #157)
Warren DeMontague This message was self-deleted by its author.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)I find it sickening. I find it sickening that we're jailing her for this. I find it sickening that she's going to have a criminal record for this that will affect her future employment, housing and government aid for the rest of her life. I find it sickening that there's people in this thread that think this situation is OK in any way. I find it sickening that there's people in this thread using this travesty to push an unrelated and destructive anti-sex agenda. I find it especially sickening that so many in this thread are so busy politicizing this story and bashing those who really care about sex workers (sorry, "happy hookers!!!" , that they've completely ignored that there is a fucking human being involved in it.
Yes, this is who we really are. Sickening, isn't it?
redqueen
(115,103 posts)Pathetic framing is weak propaganda. Leave that to the "pro life" liars.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)Anti-sex-buying. Anti-sex-selling. Anti-sex-worker. Anti-porn-worker. Anti-porn-viewer. Anti-sexuality for sexual abuse survivors. I seem to recall anti-poly as well. So I'll bite. What kind of sex are you pro-? Do tell.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)It's not such an odd thing as you imply. Pretty easy to figure out, actually.
sudopod
(5,019 posts)some kind of Communist?
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)arguing for jailing of single-provider households though. That definition is always very selective.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)But patriarchy and its favorite son, capitalism, are extremely insidious.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)redqueen
(115,103 posts)but the Nordic method doesn't punish sex sellers, only buyers. So, yeah. So much for that BS.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)And I've posted links to that before. Of course, they're sex workers. What do they know? Being pushed into dangerous work conditions is of course not punitive in any way.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)As we have seen, in countries and states where its legal, those abuses increase.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)Countries like Germany, where trafficking dropped after legalization? New Zealand, which saw no rise? Queensland (one day, you really need to read this study)? Oh dear, you'd know all this stuff if you'd bothered to read the links people gave you in the last thread. You remember, the links you didn't want to read? Facts can sure fuck with a narrative, can't they?
Abused, exploited and trafficked people are my big concern. The difference between us is that I don't advocate for 1) diverting resources AWAY from those people to jail consenting adults or 2) jailing the consenting adults who had nothing to do with it or 3) forcing the entire business into a very dangerous underground where it's easier to hide trafficking and deadly for the consenting adults.
Do you have some evidence that the rest of us aren't privy to showing that the woman in the OP was underage, not consenting, was trafficked in some way, or was abused by anyone but the police? Yet here's you, upthread, snarking at those of us who dare to think she might have been a consenting adult and shouldn't, as a consenting adult, have had to fear arrest. This does not impress me with your "concern". It DOES, however, totally contradict your supposed support for the (failing) Swedish model. Care to play again?
Incidentally, this was not a "trade sex for food". It amazes me how many people in this thread failed to read anything but the misleading headline, yet still managed to have an opinion on it.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)as if its meaningful. As if their absence from legal brothels proves that there's no problem anywhere outside those locations.
Unreal.
You can believe the reports of those who, like you, support this multi billion dollar industry.
I'll side with others, thanks.
http://www.object.org.uk/the-prostitution-facts
Oh and yes, what woman wouldn't want to have sex with a stranger for $40 and some cheeseburgers? Of COURSE she was consenting. That's so entirely reasonable, I dont know how I missed it.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)The trafficking numbers in the legal, regulated brothels in Nevada are ZERO. Read that again. ZERO. I'm sorry the idea of ZERO TRAFFICKING bothers you that much. I'll let you tell the class how much better the trafficking numbers look like in Vegas. Or L.A. Or New York.
I'll wait right here while you get those numbers, shall I?
And, well, I don't think I ever billed for cheeseburgers, but $40 but about the going rate at the time I was working, so... Me. I had sex with quite a few strangers for $40, over the course of 10 years. Now go ahead and tell me that I don't have the capacity for consent, ma'am. Say it to my (figurative) face.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)right?
When was that the going rate? Prices usually do rise over time.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)and they are ILLEGAL EVERYWHERE IN THE WORLD. The brothels in NV that are LEGAL and REGULATED have ZERO TRAFFICKING. I'm sorry that offends you- wait, no. I'm not sorry at all. I'm damn glad that offends you. It demonstrates your actual level of concern for trafficking victims. Got those statistics on Vegas yet? I'll wait right here.
I worked from 1991 to 2001. Prices in the sex trade were pretty constant that whole time and last time I checked hadn't changed yet.
Suddenly you've backed off the consent issue. Was there a problem? Having trouble telling me directly that I lack the mental capacity for consent, like all the rest of the "happy hookers"? Why?
redqueen
(115,103 posts)Just because its illegal doesn't mean those victims are any less deserving of consideration.
And no, you're not getting it. The happy hookers are the only ones who are freely consenting and don't want to stop hooking. It's the rest of them who are forced into it, that I care about.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)or the Nevada brothels, where trafficking is zero? Or New Zealand, which had no rise? Didn't we just do this? Giving consideration to the victims involves getting them help and resources, and most importantly it involves not making things worse. This is also what is involved in caring about them. You are doing none of the above.
Your words:
How does that imply that you believe in consent? In fact, where have you ever implied that you believe that any of us consent? You've hidden behind a lot of blather about money as coercion and childhood abuse leaving us mentally incapable, but never once have I seen you admit that we consent. So are you now admitting that prostitution IS a consensual act? That consenting adult women, no matter their background, are perfectly capable of saying yes or no?
If so, that's a good first step and we can now work on you separating "prostitution" from "trafficking". If not, we can double back to where I told you to say it to my face. Take your pick.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)She tries to paint others (men!) as having no respect for sex workers, but she doesn't show any respect herself.
She tried to paint me as an uncaring, amoral bastard, but I have nothing but the highest respect for sex workers. I could never do what they do. I tried to imagine it, but I couldn't see myself do it. I think they have will-power and determination and a lot of guts. I think it's a hard job and I respect that.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)like any other job. Has its moments of entertainment. Pays well. Good hours if you're solo.
You've got to have the head for it, though. Bring your work home with you, or your real life to work, and you're not going to do well at it. A union setup of some kind that could weed out the ones that can't handle it would be something I'd like to see. It's not a job for everyone.
Response to LadyHawkAZ (Reply #200)
Post removed
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)The educated:
http://eprints.qut.edu.au/16398/1/Charlotte_Seib_Thesis.pdf
http://www.gwu.edu/~soc/docs/Weitzer/Prostitution_Facts.pdf
http://faculty.unlv.edu/brents/research/violence.pdf
http://www.bayswan.org/swed/ClaimedSuccess.pdf
The personal:
http://rabble.ca/news/2012/02/would-be-sex-work-abolitionist-or-aint-i-woman
http://www.nswp.org/fr/news-story/elena-jeffreys-scarlet-alliance-explains-why-feminists-should-listen-sex-workers
http://rt.com/news/underage-prostitution-trafficking-us/
And the official, like I posted elsewhere. There's a decent body of work on the subject, if you look for it; Google tends to bury it under a pile of trash with the name Farley on it. I have a personal stake, so I look for it. Others who don't have a personal stake- or in some cases, a heart- get stuck in the pile of trash and wind up with the wrong ideas. Some of them actually mean well; they're just going about it the wrong way.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)So taking away their livelihood is a good thing to do?
redqueen
(115,103 posts)No sale.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)They should just starve because you don't agree with their choice? Is that what you're saying?
Take away their income and their self-reliance because that's the 'feminist' thing to do?
redqueen
(115,103 posts)Trafficked, abused, addicted, coerced, exploited people's concerns trump the right of happy hookers to sell sex. Watch me not cry about them having to find other jobs. 9 out of 10 want other jobs.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)If you cared about the trafficked, abused and exploited, you would favor legalization.
If you cared about women in general, you'd let them make their own choices instead of deciding for them.
If you respected women, you would not belittle them like this.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)And where am I deciding anything for women? I'm not advocating that we criminalize selling sex.
As for your belief that legalization helps victims, I disagree. Guess you hadn't noticed despite.my repeated statements, the facts evident where you live as compared with the countries where actual progress is being made, etc.
Attempting to discuss this with you is a waste of time.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Oh, and in this entire thread, you haven't shown one shred of evidence for your claims about the 'successes' of the Nordic countries. Just like you didn't in all the previous threads on this subject. No sources, no data, no firgures, no nothin'.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11437499
http://www.thelocal.se/9621/20080110/
http://www.lauraagustin.com/magical-thinking-of-swedish-law-evaluation-refuted-by-new-swedish-research
I have a good deal of admiration for people like Ostergren and Augustin. It can get difficult to keep repeating the facts over and over to people who just don't want to hear them. I get insulted enough, and I'm just a former sex worker. It's got to be a bit worse to be a professional and subject yourself to this.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)It's the only possible explanation!
stevenleser
(32,886 posts)Right now its illegal to be sex worker or john, right? That isnt stopping prostitution, so the approach is to make only one side illegal and THAT should work?
Who buys that kind of garbage?
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)No one else with any sanity, though. It hasn't dropped demand. It hasn't dropped supply. It hasn't stopped trafficking or increased safety. It's a failure.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)That's the entire abolitionist message.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)reducing the demand for a 'product or service' with punishments, let alone death.
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)First "sweatshops", now "capitalist"!
Except that demand has not decreased, anywhere, including Sweden. And if you'd like to dispute the fact that underground prostitutes die, I've got a whole lotta links to post. Oh wait... I already have. Twice.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)This is a waste of time.
And I'll pass on the propaganda from Ms. Agustin. Anyone who downplays trafficking as a problem is not someone I take seriously.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)Do you not read your own posts?
And I don't actually expect you to read the links. You've demonstrated over and over that you're not interested in anything but rhetoric. But other people do read these threads, and hopefully someone else will read them and have a change of heart. Also, unlike some, I like to be able to say I've provided proof. I've found that it comes in handy down the road.
redqueen
(115,103 posts)post links to all the dubious sources you want. I'm sure many people will find them comforting. Me, I'll trust that anyone who cares is capable of sifting through the competing interests' studies and claims, and deciding which analysis is more credible.
Have a great day.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)I read them and found them informative!
LadyHawkAZ
(6,199 posts)And your post made my morning.
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)spouting the same conservative crap over and over to understand that liberal has nothing to do with them.
DutchLiberal
(5,744 posts)Everything can be used to joke about. Literally everything. Making a joke about it doesn't mean we don't think this is serious and very bad and all. We still do. But we also make a joke about it. Walking and chewing gum at the same time, does that sound familiar to you?
Better never watch shows like Bill Maher's, or Britain's Have I Got News For You, or the Dutch equivalent. They joke about EVERYTHING! They would probably joke about this incident, too. But because you're too uptight to be able to seperate a joke from real concern, they are all "sociopathic misfits"?
Wow.
Oh, and I must be one, too, because I saw some pretty good ones upthread.
sudopod
(5,019 posts)"Naw, bro, it's cool, they do it on TV all the time!"
Ha...ha.
No, really, tell me another one. Have any good starving children jokes to go along with the starving women jokes? How about the one where you explain how many Jews fit in an oven?
This whole place is just a god damned laugh riot.
KitSileya
(4,035 posts)I don't know her motivation for prostituting herself (hunger? drugs?) but I really wish the newspaper hadn't released her name. With a crime like this, when the only victim is the woman herself, I do not think releasing the name to the public should be necessary. It messes with her chances of get her life in order again that family, neighbors, current or prospective employers can see that she's been arrested for soliciting.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)More punishment for the transgressor..
RZM
(8,556 posts)Personally, I didn't believe it, but the rumor was fairly widespread. This version was remarkably similar though, right down to the two cheeseburgers. This rumor also involved weed.
This person (it was a guy) was not starving - he ran away from home and had no income. Apparently it was a one-time thing. That is, if it happened at all.
This doesn't signal our doom as a society. Most likely this is a drug addict who has seen better days and has found that she cannot get very much money for offering her services. So she's dropped the price. It's sad, but it's part of drug culture.
Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)Freddie Stubbs
(29,853 posts)BiggJawn
(23,051 posts)Maybe she thought the guy was good-looking enough to fuck and when he starts talking about price figured "Hey, get my rocks off *AND* lunch? Deal me in!"
Response to BiggJawn (Reply #269)
Post removed
sendero
(28,552 posts)... human being, he would have bought her the burgers and went about his business. I hope no one in his family is ever that desperate.