Police officers & lawyers, I need your wisdom please re brothels

[MrsMcEnroe]

Hello all,

Some background: I own a shop in a part of town that has been grotty and neglected for years but which is now, thanks to a lot of hard work from residents and traders plus a Lottery grant, now starting to regenerate.

Across the road from my shop is a brothel. It is acknowledged as such by the local police. Residents and traders are not happy that the brothel is allowed to continue operating. Most people are worried about the supposed "dodgy blokes" (to quote a recent email, not my words, on the subject) that it brings to the area; however, I have more serious concerns regarding the welfare of the ladies working there. I have seen some of them leaving and they don't look well at all.

I am attending a meeting of the local community forum tomorrow, at which the police, council members and planning officers will tell us what they are doing re the brothel (if anything). I know I've read that prostitutes are at much higher risk of violence, including sexual violence, than other women; does anyone have any facts and figures I could use please? Also, is it even legal to operate a brothel? When I was doing my law degree 20 years ago, I'm sure brothel-keeping came under the heading of living off immoral earnings but perhaps this has changed?? I just want to make the point that there are vulnerable women right there in our midst who, rather than being condemned, should be helped. (I never qualified as a lawyer, hence my lack of current knowledge).

Or am I being naive? Or simplistic?

This post comes cross in a very stilted manner - sorry, I'm typing with 2 fingers with a puppy asleep on my lap!

TIA.

Well, that would depend again on your definintion of "want to". In the situation of voluntary prostitution, you would weigh up how much you want/ need the money with how many, if any, of your boundaries you are required to break. If, as I suggested, those boundaries are that he is clean, polite and respectful, and he is, no boundaries are broken and so the transaction takes place without trauma.

I have agreed that sexual acts which break your own lersonal boundaries, paid-for or not, are damaging.

Btw, I'm quite happy to be OLKN. But don't feel I can call you FU!

Thanks, LastMango, love the name btw.

FU how would you feel about co-operative brothels, run and managed by the prostitutes themselves?

Did you see that documentary Louis Theroux did on Navada brothels where the madam was boasting about how great it was, safe with panic alarms and CCTV in every room, security staff, etc and a young woman comes out crying because a client had just raped her without a condom? She eventually managed to get to the alarm, but no one came to help her. I thought it was interesting that this had happened during filming.

So there's primary evidence right there in a legal brothel, with all the tech and bodyguards blah blah -caught on camera.

Yes, I did, and I don't particularly like the way that brothel is run. Perhaps we could do better.

Rape happens within marriage, not sure that's an argument against marriage.

I can't remember having seen that documentary, FU, but I'm sure it was suitable dramatic for prime time viewing.

You can call me FoodUnit or Food if you prefer.

I just think people who are prostituted should be fully decriminalised and only the people buying/exploiting them should be punished.

I agree with everything you've said food

On the full decriminalisation of prostitutes, I agree. Less sure about criminalising punters.

LMIP It wasn't 'dramatic' it just showed the boredom, sadness and inner conflict of the prostuted women and the jovial detachment of the other profiteers. The rape thing wasn't even treated like a big deal.

Aargh, there is no "decriminalisation" of prostitution needed, it is legal to work as a prostitute!

And there is a huge difference between "prostituted women" and "women who choose to work as prostitutes". Just for once, I thought we were discussing the latter, given that in the OP it is said that police and general society are aware that the property is being used as a brothel, and has been for some years.

If the brothelkeepers were using unwilling, trafficked-against-their-will, underaged etc, it would have been noticed by now.

well op was expressing concerns about their welfare 'don't look well at all'
update op?

I'm talking about the things the women get charged for currently: soliciting, loitering etc

Yeah, it's legal to work as prostitute - but not in any safe environment, which IMVHO amounts to criminalisation, IYSWIM.

And yy, there's a huge difference between 'prostituted women' - who are likely to be the victims of several violent crimes - and women who choose to work as prostititutes.

If the brothelkeepers were using unwilling, trafficked-against-their-will, underaged, etc, it would have been noticed by now.

I don't think that's necessarily true, OLKN. What makes you think that's so?

"If the brothelkeepers were using unwilling, trafficked-against-their-will, underaged etc, it would have been noticed by now."

You must know a different version of humanity than the one I see everywhere. What I've noticed is that people instinctively defend the status quo, like to think life's a bit rough and bohemian around the edges, they blame victims and prefer to stereotype the desperate rather than attribute them with full humanity. In the reality I see, loads of shit goes unnoticed for years and even gets joked about - because it happens to them not us.

Food, soliciting and kerb-crawling (both illegal) were criminalised on public nuisance grounds. Not quite sure how they relate to brothel-based prostitution?

LastMango, because contrary to the notion that all punters are misogynistic creepy bastards, most would notice a terrified woman cowering away from them. Most would at least sense an air of unwillingness, and most are aware that fucking an unwilling woman is rape. The main "punting" website (apparently you cannot write the name for fear of "invasion") has on it's front page a warning about trafficking and the CrimeStoppers contact info.

Apparently about one in twelve men aged over 18 has used the services of a prostitute. Look around you, count every twelfth man you see in a busy high street. He's a punter.

Incidentally, I'm not saying that under-aged or trafficked prostitution doesn't exist, of course it does, and foul bastards who prefer their women cowering.

But I don't think that's mainstream in the UK. And the results of Operations Pentameter 1 & 2 would support me.

Food, you still haven't said... What about co-operative brothels, run by the prostitutes themselves?

on the other hand since op's concern is based on the demeanour of the women observed in this particular case, it seems glib to dismiss it as 'free trade' just because it's a local landmark

Yup. One in twelve - misogyny really is the norm.

Also mentioning 'that site'... If you read it, the whole creepy misogynist thing is all there to be viewed if you can stomach it. You'll not feel like defending them if you do. The trafficking thing on the front page is one of those 'veneers' LMIP mentioned.

OLKN - ISWYM. But it's actually much harder to 'spot' a trafficked person than that.

Firstly, there's a grey definition of 'trafficked', so many people who have in fact been trafficked don't recognise this themselves. For example, very often they've been brought to another country having been deceived into believeing that they have completely different work lined up, have their papers taken, etc. - and don't know what their rights are.
Women and men (and children) who have been trafficked are also unlikely to display typical 'fear'/'victim' signals - cowering, etc., but what is likely to be more frightening is punishment from pimps if they don't please the clients. So they're more likely to present as chatty, enthusiastic, etc. And even when they are questioned by people trying to 'help', they're unlikely to say anything against traffickers/controllers for fear of being grassed up.
So it's not easy to identify a trafficked prostitute.
Will find links to this later if you like. Too tired now. good night.

Ninah, you have a valid point, and I would hope that will be addressed at the community meeting mentioned in the very first post.

Food, I haven't looked at that site for ages (and have you seen the version by those cast out?!) but have had cause to contact the site admin in the past. I am pretty certain that it is not a veneer in his case.

"Food, you still haven't said... What about co-operative brothels, run by the prostitutes themselves?"

I've said I believe the prostituted women should not be criminalised in any way.

I know that the sex industry is big business and any re-wording of the law to allow for these co-ops would be fully exploited by the pimps.

I'd hope so too but am cynical wrt corporate interests
please report back op!

LastMango, sorry, I was simplifying stuff because I am also tired. But honestly, punters are just men, not some special breed, they can read body signals. Not all of them choose to, of course, but that's true with some men anyway, as we see all of the time.

Totally agree about the whole "trafficking" issue being fudged, from both directions; under English law I/you could get done for "trafficking" if we gave a friend a lift to work, if she was working as a (willing) prostitute.

The language has been defiled.

But how do you know that, Food? Have you any evidence that co-operative brothels, run by willing prostitutes, are bad for the women involved? When pimps are, by definition, eliminated?