Kamala the hypocrite

[Jolly_Penguin]

Yes, but a child goes missing from the care of a millionaire and suddenly it's a nation wide search.

And why do you think that is exactly? And how do you think stigmatizing and criminalizing sex workers effects their perceived value to society and how much effort is expended in investigating crimes against them?

 

[bilby]

I find it astonishing that you can assert that so confidently, in response to a post in which I explicitly told you exactly why it cannot be the case.

Perhaps the people using the term in the 1820s were psychic? Or maybe General Hooker was a precocious child and established his first brothels at the age of six?

Reality exists. Opinions are subordinate to it - even if they make for an entertaining and memorable fable.

The word 'hooker' to mean 'prostitute' was widely used well before the civil war; Your claim is simply wrong.

Reality isn't subject to opinion; Not even to popular opinion.

But your apparent belief that it is, goes a long way to explaining why you are so confidently and persistently wrong about so much else. It must be nice to live in a world where everything is certain, and you never need to modify your opinions due to new information.

I keep forgetting. Bilby is ALWAYS right about American history. Even when he doesn't read that I said that term came into WIDE USE after Hooker. Not that it originated with Hooker. And of course, the internet made certain that everybody in 19th century America was very au currant with all of the latest slang. Or maybe it was radio. I don't remember....

Sure. You used enough weasel words to be able to claim that as you didn't say anything of any value, you couldn't have said anything wrong.

That certainly seems better than simply admitting your mistake in promulgating a widely believed falsehood.

Some passive aggresion should help underscore your defense. Perhaps also accuse the person who points out your disinclination to admit error of being guilty of your own offense.

Keep it up, and you too could become President.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Sure. So tell me again how terrible it is that Backpage got shut down for publishing ads for underage hookers? What changed, exactly? All of a sudden, men can't get underage girls? We know that's not the case. All of a sudden, outcall prostitutes can't service clients? Nope. Also not true. Streetwalkers are still streetwalkers.

The only thing that happened is that finally someone said out loud that you cannot make a profit from advertising underage prostitutes and call yourself a legitimate business.

Or, you could look at the unbiased data and studies southernhybrid and others just posted above, read court decisions, or listen to sex workers themselves. Why are you dismissing them? Why do you devalue the sex workers' first hand views and opinions? Is it the same reason the police aren't investigating their deaths as much as children of rich kids gone missing?

Yeah, so tell me again how testing protects prostitutes? Because it doesn't.

Yeah, it does. Stopping the infection from spreading to any given person (man or woman) protects everybody that person later has sex with.

Also there are more than one STI that is incurable. And some that are much harder to cure than they used to be.

What is your point? This somehow means to you that we shouldn't test the sex workers to try to stop the spread of the disease?

Oh, ffs, Loren. Do you really believe that you can tell if someone has HIV by looking at their dick? Or syphilis? Or gonorrhea? Or chlamydia?

You can spot some cases of some infections visually. He didn't say you can catch all. What is your point here?

Are you really unaware that many STIs are asymptomatic in their early, most contagious stages? Especially in men? Did you get all of your vast knowledge about STIs from some 1950's military educational film?

Loren's point stands regardless of there being STIs that are asymptomatic in their early stages. That there are some that CAN be spotted is all his point requires. Again, what is your solution? Keep it illegal so there is no regular mandated testing of anyone in the prostitution industry? How is that better? Please do explain.

And here's another idea. If we legalize and regulate, then we could make paid sex without a condom illegal, like riding a motorcycle without a helmet.

 

[laughing dog]

What is the acceptable number of trafficked women?

Do you even know what an honest reply is?!

Apparently you don't.

[
I was specifically asking about an increase. The baseline number is irrelevant for this, thus the concept of an "acceptable" number makes no sense in this context.

Of course it makes sense. You threw in the fact that the numbers include some volunteers. Unless you have evidence all of them are volunteers, then the numbers are growing. So, your question was pretty much a red herring, and it implies there is an acceptable number of trafficked women.

Is there an acceptable number of trafficked women?

 

[laughing dog]

Sure, effects frequently precede their causes, so clairvoyance is needed to tell which came first.

No one wrote anything remotely connected to that. Given your posting history, I'm very surprised you concocted such a straw man, let alone such an idiotic one.

You confused the term "widely used" with "originated". People make mistakes. Get over it.

 

[laughing dog]

And here's another idea. If we legalize and regulate, then we could make paid sex without a condom illegal, like riding a motorcycle without a helmet.

It is pretty easy to spot a motorcycle rider without a helmet. How easy do you think it is to spot a penis without its helmet?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The truth is that law enforcement pursues criminal cases that they think matter. Ask any Indigenous woman in Canada.

Something you're missing here: Law enforcement looks not only at how serious the crime is but how easy it will be to catch the perpetrator.

A streetwalker disappears in an area with a transient population (say, a truck stop). What's the chance of catching her killer? There's two basic ways they'll get caught: 1) DNA or the like at the scene (and that's assuming her body is even found), 2) A security camera caught who she went with. Note that illegal prostitution means that she's going to be avoiding the cameras. When a body is found after extended exposure there's nothing for the cops to do. The importance doesn't magically give the police more options.

Yes, but a child goes missing from the care of a millionaire and suddenly it's a nation wide search.

Because of the news, not because of the police.

As far as illegal prostitutes avoiding cameras--please.

You're going to commit a crime in front of a security camera?!

As far as police being able to 'do nothing after extended exposure:' Sorry. I know quite a bit about the science of identifying remains years and decades after the death. Nothing is what is often done. Nothing is not at all related to what can be done. One simply must care.

Try reading what I wrote! Sure, there's a lot they can do to identify who it is. What I'm saying they can't identify after extended exposure is DNA from whoever killed her.

I don't know if hookers being murdered at truck stops is part of your personal fantasy life but it's not really the biggest worry for prostitutes.

We are talking about prostitutes at small, remote places with a lot of truck traffic. Who else would their clientele be?! This is the usual crap from those who keep trying to make everything about racism. Their killers would be no easier to identify if they were white.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

There are successful stings periodically. And why would they need a 'sting?' It would be easy to catch prostitutes and their customers if there was a desire to do that.

And how do you convict them of solicitation without a sting? The police knowing she's a hooker and her having sex with somebody isn't enough to convict. You need an offer of sex for money.

Sure. So tell me again how terrible it is that Backpage got shut down for publishing ads for underage hookers? What changed, exactly? All of a sudden, men can't get underage girls? We know that's not the case. All of a sudden, outcall prostitutes can't service clients? Nope. Also not true. Streetwalkers are still streetwalkers.

By shutting down Backpage you made it harder for outcall prostitutes to find clients. Streetwalking is a way of finding clients. You just forced them from a safer means of working to a more dangerous means of working. In your quest to save women you have killed women. Happy?

The only thing that happened is that finally someone said out loud that you cannot make a profit from advertising underage prostitutes and call yourself a legitimate business.

I can't see anything here said the blind man.

The issue isn't the cost. The issue is sidelining the infected girls until they're over their infections. At the high end with established clientele they'll do this, at the low end where they'll probably not see the john again they won't.

Yeah, so tell me again how testing protects prostitutes? Because it doesn't. Also there are more than one STI that is incurable. And some that are much harder to cure than they used to be.

The fewer infected johns the less likely a prostitute is to be infected. The Rhode Island "experiment" showed lower STD rates for the state.

STD testing at brothels protects clients only, not the prostitutes.

Directly, no. Indirectly, yes--they know catching something will take a bite out of their income so they're much more willing to check a dick and reject a client whose dick doesn't look right.

Oh, ffs, Loren. Do you really believe that you can tell if someone has HIV by looking at their dick? Or syphilis? Or gonorrhea? Or chlamydia? Are you really unaware that many STIs are asymptomatic in their early, most contagious stages? Especially in men? Did you get all of your vast knowledge about STIs from some 1950's military educational film?

It's not perfect. Note, however, that if the man has no sores and wears a condom the woman is very unlikely to be infected even if he has something.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And here's another idea. If we legalize and regulate, then we could make paid sex without a condom illegal, like riding a motorcycle without a helmet.

Which is exactly what we have done here--and it works. Old data but relevant:

http://articles.latimes.com/1991-08-26/news/mn-888_1_public-health-study

And from Rhode Island, simply from legalization without any inspection rules:

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/decriminalizing-prostitution-linked-to-fewer-stds-and-rapes

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

And from Rhode Island, simply from legalization without any inspection rules:

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/decriminalizing-prostitution-linked-to-fewer-stds-and-rapes

A follow up study would be interesting. After recriminalization did the rates of STD and rape rise again?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And from Rhode Island, simply from legalization without any inspection rules:

http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/decriminalizing-prostitution-linked-to-fewer-stds-and-rapes

A follow up study would be interesting. After recriminalization did the rates of STD and rape rise again?

Interesting, but I'm not finding more recent data.

 

[Derec]

We are talking about prostitutes at small, remote places with a lot of truck traffic. Who else would their clientele be?!

 

[Derec]

And it's not just Backpage. The same crusade has been going after all their screening tools, even things like their databases of johns to avoid.

And hotels and even restaurants are now basically assuming women travelling alone might be escorts, and that all escorts are "trafficking victims".
When Anti-Sex Trafficking Policies Like the Marriott's Do More Harm Than Good

"Some things listed were not speaking English well, having sex toys, condoms and lube, asking for extra towels and sheets and not wanting housekeeping in your room," she tells PAPER. "When I saw that, I realized how dangerous that could be for pretty much any woman, especially [trans women, as well as Black and Brown sex workers traveling] alone and booking a room at any Marriott hotel, because the tips just seemed very subjective."

This only seems to be the tip of the iceberg in terms of restaurants, hotels, and other businesses recently shutting out single, female patrons for fear that they are potential sex workers. Earlier this month, Nello — a chic restaurant on NYC's Upper East Side — came under fire after allegedly banning a female executive (and Nello regular) from dining alone at the bar as part of effort to "crackdown on hookers." Not only that, but in the wake of Santos' tweet going viral, several people have come forward to allege that other hotels had similar policies and training protocols for employees that included such broad-reaching things like "look for acrylics."

It goes on

As we've seen happen with things like Tumblr's adult content ban and legislation like FOSTA/SESTA, blanket initiatives meant on their surface to protect victims perpetuate misconceptions surrounding sex trafficking and, in turn, end up impinging upon the livelihoods of independent sex workers. As Santos points out, policies like the Marriott's only serve to push independent sex work further underground, thereby endangering the well-being of those they target as "we know the history of violence that comes with calling the police on a sex worker." These policies can also "minimize" the experiences of those who are actually trafficked, Santos says. "Trying to police women's actions will not stop sex trafficking," Santos reasons. "It also gives people this savior complex, where they believe that all sex workers need to be saved because they think we are being abused. Reality is, plenty of sex workers choose this work and really enjoy it."

 

[Derec]

That's the only claim of trafficking in the article--and note that it's not about getting women into the business.

Nor is it about forcing anybody. If you have a high-wage economy with legal sex work, of course it is going to attract sex workers from abroad. Just like any industry in that economy will attract workers from abroad for the same reason - they can earn more money.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

How widespread is this redefinition of trafficking? And what is the most common but accurate word we should all be using instead? "Forced"?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

That's the only claim of trafficking in the article--and note that it's not about getting women into the business.

Nor is it about forcing anybody. If you have a high-wage economy with legal sex work, of course it is going to attract sex workers from abroad. Just like any industry in that economy will attract workers from abroad for the same reason - they can earn more money.

They could have been misrepresenting the working conditions. We don't know if it was simply about following the money.

- - - Updated - - -

How widespread is this redefinition of trafficking? And what is the most common but accurate word we should all be using instead? "Forced"?

When it's defined it always seems to be the redefinition.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

So now black people can't be racist, and human trafficking is mostly voluntary?

I spent a long time learning English. Now the words are reversing!