OAP home allows residents to book sex workers

[Charlezee]

www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4767106/investigation-into-nursing-home-for-allowing-prostitutes.html

What do you think?

So not a source then.

Pfft

Here's a more up-to-date, British-based source. myweb.dal.ca/mgoodyea/Documents/Sex%20work%20-%20General/Beyond%20gender%20Jenkins%20PhD%202009.pdf

Source for what? What Rhoda Grant supposedly said in a public meeting?

No, a source which Ms Grant could have used to inform herself about the current state of prostitution in the UK.

And it's written by a feminist.

I have no idea what Rhoda Grant said let alone whether she's read this paper.

Neither do I. But if Ms Grant claimed there was no other research available, she was being somewhat disingenuous. Not only is there work done by Dr Jenkins, there is also research done by Dr Teela Sanders.

When you seek to change the law, you should at least understand the effects of your changes.

We don't have a reliable account of what she said however it seems to have been on the question of age on entering prostitution. If she wasn't aware of this research no doubt someone will have raised it in the consultation. Which is the point of the consultation.

Ms Grant's lack of information/knowledge was indeed raised in the consultation, by people far better informed/more knowledgeable than her (including the blogger earlier linked, sex-worker Laura Lee). I will be interested to see the outcome of the consultation, given that the previous attempt was thrown out on Human Rights grounds.

As suspected, that quote attributed to Rhoda Grant was a blatant lie.

Consultation about any proposed change to the law never just hears from one lobby - and quite rightly takes into account the vested interests of those who are opposed to change, as well as those seeking change. Good consultation encompasses the additional views of people without vested interests and especially those who have no financial or criminal interests in the outcome. While the opinions of people who buy and sell sex should be sought, their voices shouldn't be given any greater weight than any other lobby in the consultation. The sale and purchase of sex doesn't just affect the sellers and buyers after all.

I hope it succeeds, then the rest of GB follows suit.

No - anyone with a vested financial interest is biased. That's just common sense.

The consultation was public; anyone could respond. Some of the people who did, were/are considerably better informed than Ms Grant (as one would expect, she's an MSP not an expert), including the association of police officers APOS who concluded (last time round, with Trish Godwin at the helm) that the proposed legislation was unworkable.

It will be interesting to see what happens this time.

Love your bingo card, Jaan!

I disagree. The people actively involved in prostitution (especially the workers) are the ones who will know the most about it. Unlike anyone else they will have their own experiences to add.

That's a circular argument. They're doing it. They're obviously going to speak in favour of it.

But everyone knows how abused etc prostituted women are, whyever would they speak in favour?

Yes, just read those links thanks.

The proposal seems eminently sensible, although I'd have liked to have seen more reference to the Nordic countries, where criminalisation has been successfully in place for years - and those that have gone down the legalisation route like Amsterdam, which has been an abject failure and led to the very thing that Scot-Pep claimed without any evidence, would happen if selling sex were criminalised. I.e. the whole operation was taken over by criminals and led to indigenous prostitutes suffering greater risk after being forced out by migrant workers.

Apart from the philosophical arguments about 'rights', what are your practical and personal objections to not being allowed to sell sex? For example, do you fear having to attain a mainstream job, pay tax and NI, work more hours or are there other objections? What is it you fear personally?

The ones who are actively involved and respond to a public consultation clearly have a vested interest.

Er, you have misread the proposed legislation, which would not outlaw selling sex, rather the purchase thereof.

And Flora, did everyone who responded to the consultation have a vested interest?