Bipartisan fascists go after Backpage et al

[Jolly_Penguin]

I am not sure what any of this has to do with BackPage though. Did you read my previous post?

I'm not aware of (or particularly interested in) the goings on within BackPage. I'm looking at this from a broader angle than this one case. If they were knowingly pushing sex trafficking and aiding sex traffickers by not removing adds that were clearly sex trafficking but instead merely changing them to better hide them, then I agree with the punishing that that behaviour. I'm not sure what that should mean for other adds on the site. Perhaps those who were doing this should be charged, but the company and board remain active. Perhaps they can even use it to identify, locate, and catch the sex traffickers. Seems like a golden opportunity if the Backpage people know who the traffickers are (which they may need to in order to have aided them?).

 

[laughing dog]

Earlier Toni made the claim that legalized prostitution doesn't do anything to alleviate rape. I've not yet seen any good research to back that claim up, and it is counter-intuitive.

How so? Rape isn't about sex as much as force regarding violent random rapes and entitlement regarding date rapes.

Legalized prostitution doesn't help out in either of those situations.

Rape is about both. Its a sex crime. It is motivated by sexual desire at its base, and then entitlement and power get mixed into it. Do you think a man with no sexual desire will rape? Seems very unlikely to me.

Rage and dominance can be prime motivators for rape.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

What do you think a prostitute's chances of also making for a good wife/mother are? I don't want to assume out of personal bigotry but that assumption wouldn't be favorable.

I don't like where I see such a question and presumed answer leading. Should we really be in the business of restricting people's freedoms based on our value judgments on if their actions will lead them to be good wives/mothers or good husbands/fathers? What are we then to say to those who say women shouldn't work and should stay at home and "be good mothers", or to pregnant women whose partners abandon them and who nonetheless decide against abortion? Should we restrict a woman's right to work? Should we restrict her right to have an abortion? Both can be argued to make her less of a "good mother". I'm not so sure we should be restricting a woman's right to have sex for profit either, because we deem it to make her a bad wife/mother.

As for your dystopian future.... Imagine if 100 years from now sex is no longer how we procreate, but merely a recreational activity. Imagine we are all infertile at birth and babies are made by taking genetic material not through the sexual activity of one man and one woman, and not taking up a woman's body and time, but from gene databases and creating children in vitro. Then to be raised by highly trained caregivers. All children would then have an equal start. Nepotism would no longer be a thing. Abortion would no longer be a thing. Child abuse and neglect by clueless or unsuitable parents would no longer be a thing. Genetic diseases would be eliminated. Is this a nightmare or a dream? Probably a bit of both. It would make a good movie, yes?

 

[LordKiran]

What do you think a prostitute's chances of also making for a good wife/mother are? I don't want to assume out of personal bigotry but that assumption wouldn't be favorable.

I don't like where I see such a question and presumed answer leading. Should we really be in the business of restricting people's freedoms based on our value judgments on if their actions will lead them to be good wives/mothers? What are we then to say to those who say women shouldn't work and should stay at home and "be good mothers", or to pregnant women whose partners abandon them and who nonetheless decide against abortion? Should we restrict a woman's right to work? Should we restrict her right to have an abortion? Both can be argued to make her less of a "good mother".

Point being how do we know parent/marital partner aren't incompatible roles with prostitution as a job? I doubt most men or women want a prostitute for a marital/life/whatever partner. Do note I only say women because women make up the bulk of prostitution, what I say applies both ways. I very much doubt any self-respecting woman would want to make children with a man-whore, nor would he necessarily be inclined to quit his job for the sake of a personal union.

 

[SLD]

I’m coming in late on this, but it seems to me that online sex workers have far more control over exploitation than street workers. They can screen their clients, and thus ensure they aren’t going to be raped or abused, or even murdered. My fear of shutting these sites down is that it will drive more sex workers out into the streets with less protection. If you are some pimp exploiting underage girls, the last thing you would want is to put it out online. That’s a big paper trail connecting you to an activity that can result in serious jail time. Not that it doesn’t happen for sure. But generally simply being an adult hooker is a state law misdemeanor. It would be extremely naive to assume that all women on line are underage girls being exploited. Many are sophisticated business women who choose this profession after research and analysis of it. There are plenty of blogs by these women out there that you can read. They have upscale websites of their own. They control who they see. If we shut down all of these sites, plus many other sites where they advertise, I think a lot of women are going to be subject to exploitation by being thrown out in the streets. I think law enforcement could use these sites to monitor the situations, even check up on these girls to ensure they are truly independent and not being exploited.

And that’s not say it should be legalized either. But the focus should be on shutting the Johns down, and anyone involved in trafficking. If it were legal, then trafficking and exploitation might become more common, not less. I did visit Amsterdam a few years ago and it was shocking how many of the women came from poor areas of Eastern Europe. I read somewhere that legalization made it easier to entrap women.

And no I don’t partake. I only looked And talked to some in Amsterdam.

SLD

 

[Toni]

I’m coming in late on this, but it seems to me that online sex workers have far more control over exploitation than street workers. They can screen their clients, and thus ensure they aren’t going to be raped or abused, or even murdered. My fear of shutting these sites down is that it will drive more sex workers out into the streets with less protection. If you are some pimp exploiting underage girls, the last thing you would want is to put it out online. That’s a big paper trail connecting you to an activity that can result in serious jail time. Not that it doesn’t happen for sure. But generally simply being an adult hooker is a state law misdemeanor. It would be extremely naive to assume that all women on line are underage girls being exploited. Many are sophisticated business women who choose this profession after research and analysis of it. There are plenty of blogs by these women out there that you can read. They have upscale websites of their own. They control who they see. If we shut down all of these sites, plus many other sites where they advertise, I think a lot of women are going to be subject to exploitation by being thrown out in the streets. I think law enforcement could use these sites to monitor the situations, even check up on these girls to ensure they are truly independent and not being exploited.

And that’s not say it should be legalized either. But the focus should be on shutting the Johns down, and anyone involved in trafficking. If it were legal, then trafficking and exploitation might become more common, not less. I did visit Amsterdam a few years ago and it was shocking how many of the women came from poor areas of Eastern Europe. I read somewhere that legalization made it easier to entrap women.

And no I don’t partake. I only looked And talked to some in Amsterdam.

SLD

I get your logic but it isn't supported by reality in the U.S. For example, in my small town/rural area/flyover country, every couple of months or so, there is a local newspaper article about a few men who have been caught in a prostitution sting--one where the men specifically believed that they were going to have sex with underage girls--15 year olds.

Backpage and Craigslist notoriously have had ads for sexual services for some years now. I linked upthread an interview with one former prostitute who was pimped out via ads placed by her pimp on one of these online services. The articles linked to craigslist removing such ads and backpage being shut down chronicle that this business model: posting ads online for sexual services is not new or novel but the usual way of doing things. Because it is illegal to have sex with underage persons or to actually advertise sexual services blatantly, pretty transparent code words were used. It was a cheap, effective way to market the services of the girls you were prostituting. I am not under any illusion that other similar venues won't be found and are not in use already.

 

[Toni]

I am not sure what any of this has to do with BackPage though. Did you read my previous post?

I'm not aware of (or particularly interested in) the goings on within BackPage. I'm looking at this from a broader angle than this one case. If they were knowingly pushing sex trafficking and aiding sex traffickers by not removing adds that were clearly sex trafficking but instead merely changing them to better hide them, then I agree with the punishing that that behaviour. I'm not sure what that should mean for other adds on the site. Perhaps those who were doing this should be charged, but the company and board remain active. Perhaps they can even use it to identify, locate, and catch the sex traffickers. Seems like a golden opportunity if the Backpage people know who the traffickers are (which they may need to in order to have aided them?).

Should a pharmacy which supplies illegal drugs and fills prescriptions it knows are fraudulent be allowed to remain in business to entrap the drug dealers using the pharmacy to distribute their drugs? Should the pharmacy be kept in business to better allow law enforcement to track down those who traffic in illegal drugs?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Another interesting article that comments on much of what has been mentioned above

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/rep...iums-opportunity-cost-demand/article29370187/

According to the data, prostitutes make a lot more than women in ordinary jobs. Why is there such a high premium for such low skills?

On the demand side is the randy male, often in transit, who weighs the benefits of going with prostitutes against the costs of getting caught. On the supply side, the prostitute will require higher earnings to compensate for her higher risk of disease, violence and blighted marriage prospects. "If marriage is a source of income for women," Prof. Edlund and Prof. Korn write, "then the prostitute has to be compensated for forgone marriage market opportunities." The premium reflects the prostitute's opportunity cost.

There is a ready answer to the question of why competition does not drive down sex work's rewards: If prostitutes make less, they choose a less risky line of work.

True, some prostitutes are enslaved, and the men who use their services should be prosecuted. But there are already laws on the books against the use of slave labour. I would guess that most prostitutes have chosen their work reluctantly, under pressure of need, but not involuntarily. If men who use their services are criminalized, then so should people who use the services of supermarket checkout employees, call-centre workers and so on.

 

[Playball40]

Consensual adult sex work? I'm guessing that is a VERY small portion of the workers.

So, you are in favor of sex trafficking and child prostitution?

Have you not read my post?

I am all for combating real human trafficking, but this is not a solution.

This is not about "child prostitution" or any "trafficking". This is about using those things as a cudgel to go after all sex work (including consensual, adult sex work) ads and web sites related to it. And it's passing legislation that will negatively affect Internet as a whole, by gutting CDA 230.

It's the entire Congress (except a few individuals of both parties) turning into a giant Helen Lovejoy.

 

[SLD]

Consensual adult sex work? I'm guessing that is a VERY small portion of the workers.

Your guesses are irrelevant. There are plenty of good studies that show that generally it isn’t true.

Here’s a good article that exposes some of the problems and misuse of data in many so called studies. Far too many of them rely on people who’ve been arrested and many others are based on totally misleading and indeed even manufactured statistics. The article also says that only 15% of sex work isn’t in the streets now thanks to the internet.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news.../27/lies-damned-lies-and-sex-work-statistics/

Here’s a report on a study where the researchers actually went out in the community and actually talked to people actively involved in the sex trade. And they talked to a lot of underage workers. Interestingly enough only a minority had pimps. And most of the pimps treated their women well - according to them women. They aren’t stupid enough to abuse or force the women as that is just likely to get them in trouble.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_facto...how_the_market_for_underage_sex_actually.html

Other studies have shown that where prostitution has been legalized exploitation and underage prostitution drops by huge factors. There’re avenues of relief that are unavailable if the women are engaged in illegal activity.

SLD

 

[SLD]

I’m coming in late on this, but it seems to me that online sex workers have far more control over exploitation than street workers. They can screen their clients, and thus ensure they aren’t going to be raped or abused, or even murdered. My fear of shutting these sites down is that it will drive more sex workers out into the streets with less protection. If you are some pimp exploiting underage girls, the last thing you would want is to put it out online. That’s a big paper trail connecting you to an activity that can result in serious jail time. Not that it doesn’t happen for sure. But generally simply being an adult hooker is a state law misdemeanor. It would be extremely naive to assume that all women on line are underage girls being exploited. Many are sophisticated business women who choose this profession after research and analysis of it. There are plenty of blogs by these women out there that you can read. They have upscale websites of their own. They control who they see. If we shut down all of these sites, plus many other sites where they advertise, I think a lot of women are going to be subject to exploitation by being thrown out in the streets. I think law enforcement could use these sites to monitor the situations, even check up on these girls to ensure they are truly independent and not being exploited.

And that’s not say it should be legalized either. But the focus should be on shutting the Johns down, and anyone involved in trafficking. If it were legal, then trafficking and exploitation might become more common, not less. I did visit Amsterdam a few years ago and it was shocking how many of the women came from poor areas of Eastern Europe. I read somewhere that legalization made it easier to entrap women.

And no I don’t partake. I only looked And talked to some in Amsterdam.

SLD

I get your logic but it isn't supported by reality in the U.S. For example, in my small town/rural area/flyover country, every couple of months or so, there is a local newspaper article about a few men who have been caught in a prostitution sting--one where the men specifically believed that they were going to have sex with underage girls--15 year olds.

Backpage and Craigslist notoriously have had ads for sexual services for some years now. I linked upthread an interview with one former prostitute who was pimped out via ads placed by her pimp on one of these online services. The articles linked to craigslist removing such ads and backpage being shut down chronicle that this business model: posting ads online for sexual services is not new or novel but the usual way of doing things. Because it is illegal to have sex with underage persons or to actually advertise sexual services blatantly, pretty transparent code words were used. It was a cheap, effective way to market the services of the girls you were prostituting. I am not under any illusion that other similar venues won't be found and are not in use already.

I think respectfully you are Relying on anecdotal evidence. For every criminal example, there are probably hundreds of transactions going on. You can’t rely merely on law enforcement data. It is naturally going to be skewed towards the worst cases.

 

[Toni]

I’m coming in late on this, but it seems to me that online sex workers have far more control over exploitation than street workers. They can screen their clients, and thus ensure they aren’t going to be raped or abused, or even murdered. My fear of shutting these sites down is that it will drive more sex workers out into the streets with less protection. If you are some pimp exploiting underage girls, the last thing you would want is to put it out online. That’s a big paper trail connecting you to an activity that can result in serious jail time. Not that it doesn’t happen for sure. But generally simply being an adult hooker is a state law misdemeanor. It would be extremely naive to assume that all women on line are underage girls being exploited. Many are sophisticated business women who choose this profession after research and analysis of it. There are plenty of blogs by these women out there that you can read. They have upscale websites of their own. They control who they see. If we shut down all of these sites, plus many other sites where they advertise, I think a lot of women are going to be subject to exploitation by being thrown out in the streets. I think law enforcement could use these sites to monitor the situations, even check up on these girls to ensure they are truly independent and not being exploited.

And that’s not say it should be legalized either. But the focus should be on shutting the Johns down, and anyone involved in trafficking. If it were legal, then trafficking and exploitation might become more common, not less. I did visit Amsterdam a few years ago and it was shocking how many of the women came from poor areas of Eastern Europe. I read somewhere that legalization made it easier to entrap women.

And no I don’t partake. I only looked And talked to some in Amsterdam.

SLD

I get your logic but it isn't supported by reality in the U.S. For example, in my small town/rural area/flyover country, every couple of months or so, there is a local newspaper article about a few men who have been caught in a prostitution sting--one where the men specifically believed that they were going to have sex with underage girls--15 year olds.

Backpage and Craigslist notoriously have had ads for sexual services for some years now. I linked upthread an interview with one former prostitute who was pimped out via ads placed by her pimp on one of these online services. The articles linked to craigslist removing such ads and backpage being shut down chronicle that this business model: posting ads online for sexual services is not new or novel but the usual way of doing things. Because it is illegal to have sex with underage persons or to actually advertise sexual services blatantly, pretty transparent code words were used. It was a cheap, effective way to market the services of the girls you were prostituting. I am not under any illusion that other similar venues won't be found and are not in use already.

I think respectfully you are Relying on anecdotal evidence. For every criminal example, there are probably hundreds of transactions going on. You can’t rely merely on law enforcement data. It is naturally going to be skewed towards the worst cases.

Respectfully, what are you relying on?

 

[Derec]

And that’s not say it should be legalized either.

Why not? What you wrote above is a pretty good case for legalizing.

But the focus should be on shutting the Johns down,

Why? If you insist that sex work be illegal, then surely both sides of the transaction are guilty, not just the clients. It's like arresting the drug users and letting the dealers go. Makes no sense, and I think the main reason radical feminists support it is their animus toward men.
Swedish sex workers are the ones opposed to this "Swedish Model", as are the sex workers in the countries where this model has been exported to, such as Canada and France. And I am sure US sex workers are against the efforts of the nanny-staters to "protect" them by taking away relatively safe ways to ply their trade.

and anyone involved in trafficking.

That we can agree on. As long as trafficking is defined as to only involve involuntary or deceptive practices.

If it were legal, then trafficking and exploitation might become more common, not less.

Why would it? Police can focus specifically on cases of abuse or underage hookers and leave consenting adults alone. How is police having more time to deal with actual harmful behavior going to increase such behavior?
At most you could say that these behaviors do not go down as much as one would hope - but that is not a reason to keep it illegal or make it illegal.

I did visit Amsterdam a few years ago and it was shocking how many of the women came from poor areas of Eastern Europe.

Many countries in Eastern Europe are part of the EU now. I am sure many workers in various industries in Amsterdam are from Eastern Europe. That does not make them victims of human trafficking. It makes them people who took advantage of freedom of movement in the EU to make more money.

I read somewhere that legalization made it easier to entrap women.

There is a lot of propaganda on the prohibitionist side. Usually they inflate numbers by for example counting all foreign-born sex workers as "human trafficking victims".

And no I don’t partake. I only looked And talked to some in Amsterdam.

Too bad.

 

[AdamWho]

SESTA is effecting more than Backpage.

Does anybody have any honest numbers on women forced into prostitution via these sites? Or is it just an article of faith that all prostitutes are forced?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

If it were legal, then trafficking and exploitation might become more common, not less.

This was a conclusion that the French government came to based on studying how they legalized it. They concluded that legalizing it, normalized it, and therefore spread the incidence, including demand. Since demand was increased, more legally risky ways of obtaining females was tried, including more trafficking. This is not to say that everything in life everywhere works as it does in France or even that France at another time might work some other way. I am not going to be ideological about this and am kind of on the fence about some of it, but even trying to discuss such study you are going to hear immediately how they were all radical Femi-nazis who wrote the study. It was discussed on here before.

 

[Derec]

Consensual adult sex work? I'm guessing that is a VERY small portion of the workers.

More like the other way around.

 

[laughing dog]

SESTA is effecting more than Backpage.

Does anybody have any honest numbers on women forced into prostitution via these sites? Or is it just an article of faith that all prostitutes are forced?

What proportion of prostitutes would have to be forced in order for it to make a difference?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

SESTA is effecting more than Backpage.

Does anybody have any honest numbers on women forced into prostitution via these sites? Or is it just an article of faith that all prostitutes are forced?

What proportion of prostitutes would have to be forced in order for it to make a difference?

I’m thinking anything lower than 20 of 100 and we’re good.

Is this going to be like gay marriage where people don’t want to think it is needed until they know a gay person that is nice, ie sex trafficking isn’t a thing until they know someone that was in the field.

 

[AdamWho]

SESTA is effecting more than Backpage.

Does anybody have any honest numbers on women forced into prostitution via these sites? Or is it just an article of faith that all prostitutes are forced?

What proportion of prostitutes would have to be forced in order for it to make a difference?

First I would like to see if there are any. Is that kind of information available?

 

[laughing dog]

SESTA is effecting more than Backpage.

Does anybody have any honest numbers on women forced into prostitution via these sites? Or is it just an article of faith that all prostitutes are forced?

What proportion of prostitutes would have to be forced in order for it to make a difference?

First I would like to see if there are any. Is that kind of information available?

Yes, Google Forced Prostitution.