The greens and prostitutes

They are "sex workers" ie they sell sex.

fayyive, are you our little returning pbu? Aw. I've missed you xxxxx

You come out with all the same arguments as to why you should legally be allowed to buy access to women's bodies. You seem to know a lot about Laura Lee.

We know they're well funded because they're funded on the back of "sex workers" - aka pimps. People like the abhorrent Douglas Fox and his partner.

HOUSE!

Yes yes, got it, you must defend the right of men to have access to the bodies of others at all costs

Rachel Moran on the other hand receives Government funding, and this link alleges she at one point had it put the money meant for her charity into her own personal account (if that is the case, is that actually legal?)

maggiemcneill.wordpress.com/2014/04/08/slush-fund/

"Sex worker campaigns groups are all over the place, and very well funded."

What makes you think they are "very well funded"?

"I wonder who is paying for that."

Laura Lee and sexworker activist groups don't receive any Government funding. She has to use the money she earns herself or from donations (eg Crowdfunding).

LL has over 20 years experience selling sex in brothels and 1:1 with clients either at her home or theirs.

I can't find a link but I remember she got fired from her job (in a bank I think) only because they found out she was a prostitute. She spent years and much of her own finances fighting the case for unfair dismissal and eventually lost. She's also had dog s**t put through her letterbox (not by a client but by someone opposed to prostitution). Still think she's privileged and sexwork campaign groups aren't needed?

She did not acquit herself well at all in the NI J&HC - and indeed, they ruled against her and for the Nordic model. Sex worker campaigns groups are all over the place, and very well funded. It's almost as if they're run by a small number of pimps sex work activists who want to protect their gravy train.

Being a woman in prostitution with the most money does not mean a person can afford to take litigation through numerous levels of court processes. The first is a relative term compared with the many women in prostitution who are barely surviving, the second is a requirement for substantial amounts of wealth. Both statements can be correct.

But hang on. Annie is saying we shouldn't listen to her because she's one of the ones with "the most money" etc. But Flora is saying she must not have the money to fund her case. Both can't be right.

Are you maybe just looking for any way you can find to write her off, since you disagree with her?

This woman is a well-known activist who also spoke to the NI Justice and Health Committee (where she did not acquit herself well). I doubt she has the money to fund this. "Sex worker campaign groups" - whatever that means.

I agree ArcheryAnnie

In no other area of social justice would we say that we should prioritise the needs of the people with the most choice, most money, most connectios and most access to a platform. But we do so with prostitution.

It says in the article a combination of crowdsourcing and "sex worker campaign groups". But given the woman earns enough to justify commuting from Edinburgh to Belfast for work, it sounds like she's not short of a few bob herself.

So I suppose it's kind of understandable that she doesn't want to lose her business when her customers are criminalised.

I wonder who is paying for that.

NI sex worker launching legal challenge over coming "Nordic model" law:

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/mar/22/sex-worker-to-launch-legal-challenge-against-ni-prostitution-ban

Could be interesting...

Julie Bindel isn't a reliable source? Wtf?

Really lost any credibility you were still clawing onto there.

Chopper... yes, funny that.

So many people so very very invested in ensuring that men are not hindered from purchasing access to women's bodies... They just can't stop coming back can they?

Can you provide a link? As in a reliable source and not just a Julie Bindel column.

Physical abusers would get a criminal record regardless what the law is on prostitution. The penalty for buying sex in Sweden like I'm sure I said before is nothing more than a small fine or the chance to take it to court (and out of all the men who did choose to go to court, only 2 were found guilty and neither were jailed).

I totally agree with pandora's list - and the source for most of her points would be the Swedish police dept in charge of enforcing the law.

@pand0raslunchb0x , your list

1. Source?
2. Source?
3. Prostitutes can still get a criminal record if they work in a brothel in Sweden or N.Ireland.
4. Debatable
5. Since Sweden treats all prostitutes as trafficking victims and makes no distinction between consenting workers and trafficked victims, we have no idea how many really are trafficked.
6. IMO the Nordic model would deter prostitutes from contacting the police if it means what they do will be exposed which may result in visits from social workers (and if they don't admit to being trafficked they are labelled victims of self-harm unable to look after their children) and eviction (the landlord would be forced to kick them out).

@Jackie
"I told him if he voted for them I'd stop giving him lifts in my car."

He has a right to vote for whomever he wants and the right to keep his choice private.

"pand0raslunchb0x Wed 11-Mar-15 17:50:07
By decriminalising prostitution on the Greens watch does that mean the UK cities will look like Amsterdam? It is disgusting there and It's hardly discreet is it, as you say domestic violence increases in areas where it is legalised"

Netherlands has regulation, not decriminalisation. And the violent crime rate there is actually much lower than cities in the UK despite their more liberal attitudes to the sex industry and soft drugs.

Unless one goes around Amsterdam looking like a hopelessly lost naive tourist with valuables on display, it's a very safe city.

No Lion, it isn't. However, every single time we've tried to frame the discussion looking at the men, punters, pimps, "boyfriends" etc, the conversation ALWAYS gets turned around onto the choices of women. It's almost as if some types of people believe that even if men didn't want to buy consent, then women would still choose to do this.

Which makes them idiots really.

Are any London-based MNers going to the "London Thinks" event on 13 May? I'm dithering, not least because it's being filmed, but I really trust the organisers to make it a genuine debate.

(I've just been to the page, and am very glad to see they've changed their usual "if you attend this event you consent to be filmed" disclaimer to saying that only the stage will officially be filmed, but that people in the audience may take photos of their own, so they can't promise anything. I'd be happier if they just asked audience members not to take photos at all.)

Christ - he tortured, raped and abducted 3 women and gets a shitty 12.5yrs - prob out in 6 with good behaviour? THIS is where the problem is. It's not about whether women go on the street or in a room - they go where the MEN want them to go. It isn't the women who are the problem in prostitution.