scottish feminists -

[weeonion]

Dear Sister

As you may know Rhoda Grant MSP is taking forward work to reduce and prevent sexual exploitation, through introducing legislation to criminalise buying sex in prostitution.

Trish Godman MSP held a consultation on this issue in 2010 which resulted in around two thirds of the respondents supporting the proposed legislation. Rhoda is submitting her proposal to the Justice Committee tomorrow (Tuesday 19th June)and is asking that the previous consultation be regarded as sufficient. This would mean that she could then submit her Bill without further consultation. There is also a danger that the expense of a further consultation might deter the Committee from taking forward the proposed legislation at all. This suggestion is being strongly opposed by pro-sex work campaigners as they want a lengthy consultative process that they can prolong in the hope of derailing any new legislation..

I am therefore asking you to send an email to the Justice Committee, today or tomorrow morning, stating that you support proposals to criminalise buying sex, and that in your view the previous consultation was competent and sufficient. The latter is the key at this stage.

This is really urgent. Please email now if can and ask others to do so also.

You email to [email protected]

The clerk is Peter McGrath or you can address it to Christine Graham who is Convenor. If you have time you could also email individual members. All details can be found on the committee page www.scottish.parliament.uk/parliamentarybusiness/CurrentCommittees/29845.aspx

Many thanks,

Pimps and traffickers go free Narked?

All the projects helping women to get clean, find other work etc etc would be a hell of a lot more effective if earning money by selling sex became more difficult. It would also give immediate protection to women who did continue to sell sex - there would be no need to prove rape or abuse for the police to prosecute, just that money changed hands.

I did well on this one, I got to page three (seems inappropriate in a way) before being asked what gender I am.

What difference does my neither regions have to your point Notnanny?

Pimps and traffickers would also be prosecuted. You target anyone around the women but not the women themselves. Because criminalising the women has never done any good.

My point exactly Narked criminalising people will not alter behaviour. So what is the point of it.

Cannabis is illegal, it's a criminal offence to grow or own it. So the country must be entirely free of ot then? Ah, no, actually there's more grown here now than ever before; often by trafficked slaves.

That works, then.

Hit post too soon, if criminalising women for drug use or possession has not reduced the amount of crime they committee in order to feed their habit, why would criminalising those men you catch be any different. Or if you do manage to wipe out all male pimps and traffickers what would your stance be if women came in to replace them?

You protect the women and put the stigma where it belongs. Every time a man pays to use a woman's body they'll have to hope that no-one sees them and the woman doesn't report them, or they'll have a custodial sentence and have everyone they know see them for what they are, including future employers.

Do you think there aren't women involved in trafficking now??? The 'friends of the family' who go to villages and small towns in eastern Europe and tell girls about job opportunities in London? Why would you think it would make any difference to me if those doing the exploiting are women

Are you going to engage with what me and old woman are saying Narked or just repeat the same stuff? Again in a straightforward form of words, tell us how criminalising the punters will bring about the end of sexwork, in all other examples of criminalising people for doing things it has failed. Drugs, and the american experience prohibition.

What you seem to be saying then is that once you have locked up every single man or woman that gets caught buying sex, the trade will stop?

And every single man or woman involved in the trafficking exploitation obviously?

Drugs and alcohol are addictive. Are to trying to suggest that paying for sex is addictive? Sex is something that the vast majority of the poulation manage to have with consensual partners without having to pay for it.

It won't stop it, but it the risk would put off a lot of men. Putting the power in the hands of the women who did continue to sell sex would make them a lot safer too. Women could insist on condoms being used - one phonecall from them could have the man arrested for buying sex.

Leithlurker why won't you tell me whether or not you are a man? You seem to speak like one, I shall just have to assume you are one.

NarkedRasp "All the projects helping women to get clean, find other work etc etc would be a hell of a lot more effective if earning money by selling sex became more difficult."

Interesting statement. Rehabilitation for all ? Does that include those who would prefer to stay working as a prostitute too ? Just remove their income, force them to compete against the menz on the regular job market. Some view this as the only way to bring about gender equality, resulting in their being a surplus gendered economy which can be redistributed to ('decent') women?

Yes humans are trafficked, it's a fact which no one is disputing. The levels at which it happens and the areas of industry where it occurs most are the unknowns.
Much has been done to warn those in eastern Europe of trafficking. As a consequence many females have had their freedoms restricted and are supervised at all times, often forced indoors for fear of being kidnapped and sold on as sex slaves.

You are presuming all those involved in selling sex are female, and those purchasing sex are male ?

What defines the 'sex' which is being purchased ?
How would a dominatrix fit into the mix of being in need of saving and rehabilitating ?

"Women could insist on condoms being used - one phonecall from them could have the man arrested for buying sex."

By that statement are you suggesting many women in prostitution are not pimped, or trafficked, and will have free will to call the police should a punter not want to use a condom ? As it stands if a prostitute is robbed, forced against her will to perform an act she does not wish to she already has the protection of the law.

Dittany, are you sure all, or the vast majority of men who buy sexual services are insisting on no condom use and if refused will force the woman to do so ?

Reasoning from your belief would suggest there was an almost 100% rate of STIs and HIV among those involved in prostitution as no man wanted to use a condom and women were powerless to say otherwise. Going some way to perpetuating the long held belief that all prostitutes are dirty and diseased. The last set of stats I read on the UK suggested the lowest rates of STI's were found among those who worked as prostitutes, compared to the rest of the population, due mainly to a high percentage using condoms. Sex education, the understanding of how STIs are contracted and passed on could be the reason the rates are low and all parties want to protect their health.

LeithLurker seems to speak like a man and therefore must be one? Blimey. That's like getting one of those internet tools that checks your blogposts against god-only-knows-what and decides that you're 74% likely to be a man.

FWIW it's perfectly possible to be a woman who is not in favour of sex work abolition, and without being pro the sex industry either. A friend of mine worked for Scot-PEP for many years and I trust her views from the street much more than the arguments on here that say that outlawing sex work will fix things. It won't, it'll (continue to) drive things underground.

I don't understand why anyone can fail to see that prostitution is harmful to the women involved. To those supporting it - would you be a prostitute? I know I only would if I was totally desperate.

comix 'underground' is exactly where it should be.

But you can think that prostitution is harmful to the women involved without agreeing that abolition is the right way to resolve the difficult situation that is a tangle of all sorts of issues. Who above is supporting it as a great lifestyle choice? I don't see anyone saying that in this thread.

but "underground" won't help the women involved! It will make it more dangerous for them.

'As it stands if a prostitute is robbed, forced against her will to perform an act she does not wish to she already has the protection of the law.'

And how is that working for them?