Sex: My British Job. Channel 4

[YouMakeMeWannaLaLa]

Anybody see this? It was just horrific. I really, really hope it reached the right audience: punters and their defenders. I doubt it, but I hope so

I think that was a problem with the pentameter operation too - trafficked women are terrified of admitting they have been trafficked because of 1) repercussions to their families back home and 2) fears that they will be repatriated and end up back in the hands of their traffickers.

Do you still support legalisation even though there is a substantial body of evidence suggesting that in places where prostitution is legalised, demand for prostitutes increases, and also illegal trafficking increases? Hence legalisation would just put more women in the situation of the C4 film. In Nevada, things are not 'better' for women in legal brothels - check out the Louis Theroux film in a legal Nevada brothel. Look at the first woman featured's eyes as she is led off by the punter - and tell me that's her true 'choice'.

Please don't link to any more studies that are funded by the pro-prostitution lobby again - it just wastes a whole lot of time for people to read and de-bunk these studies. So far, on the Invisible Man threads all the studies you have linked to have been too flawed/biased/funded by the red light campaigners to change anyone's minds here.

So, in your own words please...

"why must there be an assumption that anyone who does not support the prohibitionist line must be paid by the pimp punter international conspiracy-or whatever"

It's not an assumption about anyone it's just that you are bizarrely invested in this issue. Your posts don't demonstrate a concern with issues of evidence, they demonstrate a fundamental failure to understand how to evaluate evidence, a high level of cherry-picking to support your viewpoint and a disregard for those women who don't fit into your idealised outlook of prostitution.

Sabrina:
I have not linked to a single study “funded by the pro-prostitution lobby”. The studies I linked to were either academic papers published in the peer reviewed literature and funded by the countries respective research councils (the Danish one by the Sfi-the Danish social Science Research council) those in the UK by the social science research councils, the Home office or the Police.

Those in Australia mostly by the Australian Medical Resaeach council and those in NZ by their research council or by Parlaiment as part of the evaluation of the 2003 decriminalization bill. Where is the “pro-prostitution lobby”?

Your so called ”debunking” of the NZ report is based on your failure to understand “community based participatory research” which is a well known technique in Social Sciences when studying marginalized communities (look it up en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community-based_participatory_research) on the grounds that prostitutes organisations as well as academics , outreach organizations were involved in getting access to the community-you presumably think this invalidates the entire survey.

You “debunk” an Australian survey because the cover has red umbrellas on the front (!). Why don’t you take some deep breaths and read the reports fully? Watch the Scamber video? Oh no-your mind is closed-can’t do that.

And Flora I have spent my entire professional life dealing with issues of evidence, of proof and using statistics so won’t take lessons from you who does not understand purposive sampling will not read anything she claims is unrepresentative yet then cites the “survivor” Rebecca Mott as an example of how prostitution really is.

I don’t expect I will convince any one of you-it is hard to argue someone out of a position they did not argue themselves into-because in the end your believes are based on faith-an irrational belief held despite the evidence.

wino - You dismissed Home Office studies I posted information from, that didn't support your point of view.

The only groups I have ever seen using red umbrellas in this field, are those funded and supported by the pro prostitution lobby.

I know women who have worked in the sex industry in Australia. They tell a very different story to the one you present. And in Nevada there have been lots of exposes about women locked up in brothels and not allowed to leave without permission of the pimp, brothels employing mentally disabled women with a mental age of a child, etc. So no, things are not hunk dory in these countries.

Why are you putting the word survivor in quotation marks when referring to Rebecca Mott. Don't you believe her?

The NZ report asked women questions while their pimps were present. Would you tell the truth about your job if a stranger asks you questions while your boss is present? No. Then why do you expect women to tell the truth when their abusive pimp is present?

From memory, the NZ report had 4 researchers - 2 of whom were prostitutes, and 1 a member of the IUSW. So forgive me, wino, if I suspect a little bit of bias there

The Australian report had the red umbrella pro-prostitution symbol on it - so at a guess I would say it was pro-prostitution. Just a hunch.

So, I think on balance, I would prefer to listen to the UK Home Office figures, as Grennie posted.

Stop trying to pull the wool over our eyes by linking to these supposedly "academic" studies - they are biased. They are researched and written by people with a real vested financial interest in the legalisation of prostitution. Because they can legitimately make more dosh out of exploiting women.

Legalisation of prostitution will do nothing to make the treatment of women in the film any better - in fact, research shows it would just increase the number of them.

Wino: would you be kind enough to answer the question I asked yesterday following your statement that

Prostitution is not suited to everybody by any means.

What sort of people does prostitution suit do you think?

^Yes that would be interesting to hear...

wino "I have spent my entire professional life dealing with issues of evidence, of proof and using statistics so won’t take lessons from you who does not understand purposive sampling will not read anything she claims is unrepresentative yet then cites the “survivor” Rebecca Mott as an example of how prostitution really is"

Based on your posts on the IM threads, I find this statement highly implausible unless your professional life has been as a pimp-lobby shill, which would then make complete sense. You never did address the issues with purposive sampling raised by Buffy (I think) in the other thread nor acknowledge the difficulties of purposive sampling techniques where the participants in a study are selected by pro-prostitution lobbyists / sex workers.

You're right that you won't convince most of us to change our views on prostitution. The fact that all you can come up with is "faith based" when your "evidence" is challenged is a testament to the shallowness of your understanding of the topic you discuss.

flora you do talk bollocks. Purposive sampling in the cases quoted (the Danish and NZ studies) was done after a census of prostitutes which established the numbers working on the street (done by sampling on several occasions, using data from outreach organisations, and the police and using capture recapture methods to establish the number in the category of street workers).

The numbers of brothel and escort agency and private workers by using advertisements over a considerable period de-duplicating the phone numbers, establishing the addresses visiting the brothels and establishing the number of brothel workers and the numbers behind each number working in flats. That establishes the number of brothel worker, similarly for those working in flats and in escort agencies. that establishes two other categories . Male sex workers were also sampled in a similar way. That enables one to arrive at the best estimate of the scale of prostitution and the proportion in each category. Full details are given in the respective reports

It was whenthered who said purposive sampling "is the researcher choosing the sample based on who the researcher thinks would be appropriate for the survey." Well no-the categories are the type of sex work, street, brothel private which are categories established by the census. In the Danish study the researchers who questioned the sexworkers were not related to any sexwork organisation. In Nz they were-this is Community based participatory research and was felt necessary to gain the confidence of the sex workers. I don't know where Grennie gets the idea the questions were asked in front of "their pimps" it does not appear in the methods section-if she has this information she should share it..

The use of sexworkers as co-researchers with academics had no apparent influence on the results as the Danish and NZ results are pretty similar.

wino - what sort of people does prostitution suit?

wino oh dear, you've made a boo boo.

A census is a complete enumeration of an entire population. This is completely different from a sample, whether purposive or random. Here's a little cartoon to explain to you what the difference is:

www.abs.gov.au/websitedbs/a3121120.nsf/home/statistical+language+-+census+and+sample

I'm wondering if what you are calling a census is what the New Zealand government refers to as an estimation. Oh look, here they are talking about the difficulty of obtaining an accurate estimation of the numbers of workers in the sex industry:

www.justice.govt.nz/policy/commercial-property-and-regulatory/prostitution/prostitution-law-review-committee/publications/impact-health-safety/2.-estimation-of-numbers

Try word searching "census". (Hint: it's not there.)

whenthered has already commented on your NZ study extensively. I'll remind you she informed you earlier that all women who could not answer questions without an interpreter were excluded from the survey. Therefore most (if not all) of the women in prostitution in the C4 programme would have been excluded anyway.

I'm also interested in your answer to Grennie's question.

I wonder how much the sex industry pay shills?

I think wino must be looking for something to copy and paste re what sort of people are suited to prostitution as I asked the question two days ago, repeated it yesterday and now Grennie has repeated it too.

Come on wino: you seem to be such an 'expert' on all things prostitute you must know.

Well a quick answer then to the answer I posted above when I said “Prostitution is not suited to everybody by any means “(post Mon 07-Oct-13 15:42:01)-a similar point has been made repeatedly by Brooke Magnanti (aka Belle de Jour) prompting a lot of response along the lines “what sort of people are suited to prostitution?”. I am sure you could also find answers on the SAAFE website. ( and coincidentally this was posted by an ex-escort on the same topic maggiemcneill.wordpress.com/2013/10/09/it-takes-all-kinds/)

The people who do best (that is avoid burnout) are those who start prostitution relatively late (around the mid twenties) are introduced into it by their friends (female) who are already working in the industry, have a professional attitude to their work and are in a relatively supportive environment-so for instance if they are working in a brothel where the management is supportive as are their colleagues. This is really not much different from any work place environment where colleagues are congenial and the management good (see Vanvassenbeek I 2005 Burnout Among Female Indoor SexWorkers Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 34, No. 6, December 2005, pp. 627–639 DOI: 10.1007/s10508-005-7912-y)

Other personal characteristics that seem helpful is if the woman is assertive and has good negotiation skills-a disproportionate number of sex workers also have a background in the caring industry (nursing etc-and interestingly still work in the caring professions and do prostitution for extra income) which suggests those sort of skills are helpful as is an ability to listen and be empathetic (many prostitutes describe their roles as more of a therapist than as a pure sex worker). Many prostitutes describe putting on a new persona along with sexy clothes and make-up and an assumed name in the work environment. They like the acting-of being someone else and this also helps delineate their work from their home life.

An open attitude to sex is of course vital-many prostitutes seem to have been sexually active with a number of partners before entering prostitution-a high proportion cite sexual curiosity as a reason for starting in prostitution-others say things like well they had been giving it away for free why not charge for it.

All these characteristics do not make someone prostitute, many who have the above characteristics will not choose this path-but the above characteristics seem to suit the role.

And, of course, your next paper you c&p will cite that actually, despite abolitionists whinging on, 99% of prostitutes really do fit this profile.

Now shut up feminists and let me fuck'em in peace. They love it.

Any other views wino? Good a good apple cake recipe? Enjoying the new series of Homeland? Happy with your kids school? MIL getting on your nerves?
Never see you round the site. How strange.

Belle Du Jour says herself that the whole time she was in the sex industry, she never met another woman being prostituted. She worked alone. So forgive me if I don't think she has a clue what she is talking about.

Buffy
What a laod of post-modern crap-do you really think there is no external reality or is it all socially constructed? Is gravity a social contruct? Get real

No need to be rude just because you can't understand. Gravity has nothing to do with this topic - you are just confused. No shame in it