Prostitution Propaganda

Remember how the campaign against sex trafficking in the UK was shown to be largely bunk? How in fact there weren't tens of thousands of sex slaves in the UK and that the whole thing was hyped up by various charities and opportunistic campaigners?

Well interestingly the same thing has happened in the United States where widely repeated "studies" into underage prostitution have turned out to be nonsense.

Running a fake charity "rescuing" prostitutes is a great scam- you get to pose as a hero and if anyone contradicts* your facts then you imply that they are supporting child rape or slavery.

Meanwhile their efforts to keep prostitution illegal have inevitable consequences.


* Not many people want to get into arguments defending legalised prostitution in case it is assumed that they have a personal interest in the business.

WTF?!

81!!!!!


£250????

One way to stop the pensions crisis I guess.

National Hookers Service

I don't really object to councils spending money for disabled people to visit prostitutes and lap dancing clubs. No more than I object to spending money on them visiting the theatre or the shops anyway, because the underlying assumption behind the objections to spending the cash this way is that disabled people should have to suppress any politically and socially undesirable urges if they receive any help from the state.

For the genuinely disabled, receiving assistance from the state should not compel them to allow their lives to be micromanaged according to other people's moral injunctions.

In fact in so far as sex is a basic human want perhaps we should nationalise prostitutes and create a National Hookers Service which is free at the point of use for everybody, in the interests of fairness and social justice and all that crap.

Is This A Repeat?

After the myth of widespread sexual trafficking of women had been debunked last month there was always going to be a fresh moral panic:

Sophisticated networks of older men may be grooming hundreds of British children to be trafficked within the UK for sexual exploitation, the charity Barnardo's believes.

Or they may not, who knows? Best not to worry about it until someone presents some actual facts rather than idle speculation.

I'm not saying that they are definately wrong, but after the fiasco of the sex trafficking nonsense I don't think too many people will be willing to rely upon a report by 'campaigners' that says something "could" be happening or "may" be going on.

via Obnoxio.

Criminalising Witnesses.

I'm feeling bored and have nothing to write about, I wish there was another incredibly stupid article by Beatrix Campbell OBE to mock.

Hooray!

She applauds a move to punish men who pay for sex with prostitutes who have been coerced, even if they were unaware of the fact. The incidence of trafficking has been vastly and systematically exaggerated as Nick Davies demonstrated last month. Bea dismisses Davies and insists that trafficking is no more of a moral panic than satanic abuse. Or something,

However trafficking does happen on occasion . In fact some Romanian traffickers were convicted this week:

A GANG who trafficked a woman from Romania to work the streets of Manchester as a prostitute has been jailed.

The migrant workers lured their victim - a single mum in her twenties - to the UK after their building work dried up because of the credit crunch.

They promised the woman she could earn money as a dancer but forced her to have sex with up to ten men a night in Manchester's red light districts.

And the case demonstrates the biggest problem with criminalising the users of prostitutes:

She finally escaped their clutches when she appealed to one of her 'punters' and he helped her flee to his house.

Would the 'punter' have helped her if doing so would have ensured that he was charged with a criminal offence?

Prostitutes Exposed.

A Tennessee prostitute ring was recently busted by the police and the gallery of the lovely ladies involved is up here. Truly the punters of Tennessee are blessed but before you all try and hook up with them, I'm calling dibs on number 2.

Snubbing Washington's Hookers.

This Eliot Spitzer scandal is confusing me for two reasons, first of all why is it being covered so much over here when it's only a state governor involved? Finding out that someone who has styled themsleves as a 'crusading lawyer' is actually a sleazy little shit sure can't be news. From what I've read of the man this assessment by Reason's David Wiegel seems closest to the mark:

"The irony of Spitzer's scandal is that, unless we find out something far worse than what we know, this is the rare case of him not abusing power. He took some time off from a hard day of ruining careers with innuendo and novel applications of the law to buy some sex. Fine by me."

The second source of confusion is why he needed to have New York hookers brought down to the capital, why couldn't he use Washington's own prostitutes? In this age of frivolous accusations of racism I can only conclude that Spitzer's penis is racist and has discriminated against the largely black women of Washington DC in favour of white New Yorkers.

Update: Of course one thing that isn't confusing is the fact that he managed to spend thousands of dollars on his prostitutes, he's a Democrat after all.