Curious why pro-sex worker advocates have been so silent since Epstein file release??

Yes, the best thing trans rights activists could do for their safety is work towards the abolition of prostitution and safe routes out of poverty for the more vulnerable of these men.

A misunderstanding of the grammar, I think:

Perhaps if he had been investigated and arrested

Not

Perhaps if he had been hiring adult prostitutes

his sleazy predilections wouldn't have escalated

Eh?

What a weird post. How on earth does wondering if Epstein should have been investigated and arrested for attempting to pay women for sex mean they want to make more women available to men? It’s the exact opposite!

Oooof so we should make more women available to men to stop them raping?

That, my friend, is incel ideology. Something I did not expect to see on mumsnet.

I've also read that the flight records show that Bill Clinton flew on Epstein's plane a number of times [the number is disputed] but that none of the flights were to Epstein's island, and they were all in the early 2000s before Epstein was convicted.
Is giving credence to this plausible set of facts, instead of your set of facts, 'being gullible', or just keeping an open mind until the facts are established objectively?

Indeed.

I saw Zack Polanski being interviewed on Sky News very recently and enthusing about the Green policy of legalising prostitution being good for women and after a pause he remembered to add 'and men too if they're involved in sex work' 🙄 The man lives in student politics cloud cuckoo land.

All paid for sex is abuse, if there was full consent what is the money about? Prostitution is abuse of women, and demeans all women. Reduces us all to objects to be bought and paid for. HE who pays the piper calls the tune of course.

Yes, I've come across these ideas. Underground at the moment, but at base this is what empowering sex work as work means. Exploitation dressed up in designer clothes is still exploitation.

If you look at photos of Virginia Giuffre as a teenager it’s all smiles and parties in Cannes with Naomi Campbell and so on. Presumably to our pro-prostitution guests this is evidence of a glamorous lifestyle - yet she was damaged so severely to kill herself after having been exploited by these men for years. Does the line between 17 and 18 mean that suddenly these girls are fully autonomous “sex workers” doing it as a high paid lifestyle choice? Obviously not. Despite all the smiles, they were still being coerced into sex they would never have freely had without the grooming, exploitation and control over them by rich men. But then I suspect a fair number of those pro-“sex work” posters are also the type who think rape is often just a case of a woman “regretting bad sex”…. 😬

Totally agree! I’ve commented on a few threads about the shifting perspective with this.

Now, cynically, I think it’s more about wanting to be anti Epstein and anti royal than in defence of sex workers- because some of these sex workers on the face of it were getting a good deal. Private jets, tours of Windsor, princes and moguls… Is this sex work just work, because travelling for work is normal. Or is it people trafficking?

Personally, consent can’t be bought, there’s always an imbalance of power when someone is wealthy enough not to need to work and someone is working at having sex to earn money.

I’ve been wondering about exactly this. The most recent accusation against Andrew Mountbatten Windsor concerns a Russian woman in her 20s who apparently asked Epstein if he could arrange a night with Andrew in London and then emailed the next day to say what a great night it had been. Presumably the pro sex work lot think this is all marvellous.

People who support things with an obvious capacity for bad consequences tend to fall silent about those bad consequences when they actually happen. It's the same pattern we see with men in women's prisons, a problem most pro-trans people deal with by simply not talking about it.

I dont understand the point of the OP

There are a few rather obsessive and very prolific pro-prostitution posters on MN, all with very similar posting styles, who usually jump instantly on any thread about prostitution to argue about how empowering prostitution is for women; how prostitutes are mostly doing it quite happily for high class call girl work and a luxury lifestyle, etc. etc.

Strangely, as predicted by the OP, they seem not to want to post on the Epstein threads. I wonder why? Possibly because it isn’t remotely lovely and empowering in reality?

"...Trump wasn’t up to his neck in Epstein’s world but Clinton was...'

Er, what? Bill Clinton went to the island more than 2 dozen times. And Hillary went to Epstein's ranch.

The flight logs are available to anyone online and Pam Bondi (US Attorney General, if you don't know) says they're real.

Not only did Trump never go, he helped Alex Acosta get the only conviction against Epstein - and was commended by Acosta for that fact.

Honestly, this just highlights what happens when gullible people believe anything they read in any news outlet that calls men 'she'.

I dont understand the point of the OP.

Obviously those who suppport sex work, whether claiming to be feminist or otherwise would say adult women choosing to sell their bodies would not oppose it. Some would even say that there is always a risk of violence (mentioning that as until recently there hasn't been much info in the public domain about how violent a lot of these men were).

And I am sure that those who support sex work would have some sort of statement about under age girls should not be used by adult men.

I think maybe the issue is that OP feels some women who put themselves forward to comment on this that or the other are important. They aren't. They just have an over inflatted idea of how important the are.

The real quesiton is why OP thinks they are important.

Ordinary women that I know whether feminist or not, pro sex or not, are all shocked.

Suggest OP finds new friengs, and not bother with those who think they are important enough to publish themselves.

I would of course be shocked in someone who frequently posted on FWR start a thread about why is everyone getting so upset!

The whole way they talk about these women shows that it's not about sex workers. Becuase the point is that Epstein could get "girls" (that's the nicest/ least offensive term theu use) that these men felt they couldn't. Whether that's because of what/who these girls were, the fact that these men didn't want to be out there doign it themselves but Epstein had some sort of dodgy way in, or whether it's because it was about the sheer scale of it.... it's all generally disgusting the way they speak about it and frankly, even the people out there who like to bang on about "sex work is work" should be able to see it.

I agree. Looking at some of the marriages of these men, I have to wonder if the institution of marriage has ever fully evolved beyond being a transaction between two men. But that isn't the topic of this thread.

Regardless of whether things start out as consensual - the whole business of sex or sexual favours for money, or other benefits, is simply degrading and abusive. Initially 'choosing' to get involved does not detract from this fact and is surely something we should be cautioning against rather than encouraging.

As ever, we’ve got at least one idiot on the thread trying to make out that feminists haven’t been campaigning against porn and sexual exploitation since oh, forever.

If there’s one truism, it’s that there is always a grimy little political tribalist desperately trying to get “women” en masse to put their rights aside and join their crusade instead - whether it’s to save the working class, or trans rights, or to get Farage elected, or pretend that Trump wasn’t up to his neck in Epstein’s world but Clinton was - but really, they’re all the same and need the same message. “No thank you!”

The likes of Epstein must laugh themselves hoarse at the parade of earnest, worthy progressive types defending "sex work".

When she said we couldn't "punish clients," I gawped.

Why the fuck shouldn't we? Why wouldn't a decent, sane society want to punish and penalise men who think they can buy consent from largely trafficked women unable to stop them?

Chapman is despicable.

If it was a US federal crime, perhaps not.

I don't know if there are any women who consentually participated in Epstein's world. I haven't read any of the documents and I don't plan to. It seems they may have been exposed to everything else that was happening which expands beyond sex-work implications and into support of crimes if they are not reported.

This. He was also using adults (very young adults). If that had been seen as transgressive, we might not be here.

In the olden days, the CIA, Mossad, KGB would get married men in comprising situations with adult women. Now it's girls.

Epstein wasn't investigated and arrested for hiring adult prostitutes.

Only because he was able to do a deal not to be.