Amnesty International says laws against buying sex breach men's human rights

[DonkeySkin]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2545003/Amnesty-calls-legal-prostitution-Charity-says-laws-ban-people-buying-selling-sex-breach-human-rights.html

The organisation is planning to adopt a position that calls for the full decriminalisation of the sex industry, including johns and pimps.

It is tabling a paper for its UK branch to vote on that says it is a human right for 'consenting adults' to purchase sexual consent from another person (regardless of the desperate circumstances that person may be in, presumably). The paper also devotes time to that latest favourite cover-all for sex-industry advocates, 'the rights of the disabled', as a reason to allow the continuing expansion of the global sex industry with no oversight or concern from governments.

Apparently the human rights of the (overwhelmingly) women and girls who are coerced, trafficked and enslaved inside the sex industry to satisfy the demand from men for paid sex are of no concern.

Oh, sorry - Amnesty does remember to devote a whole two words to this, conceding that prostitution takes place in an 'imperfect context'. That would presumably be the context of a worldwide patriarchy that devalues female human beings, denies them education, safety and fairly paid work, and tells men they have the right to use their bodies for sex regardless of their actual desires. Not to mention, systemic racism, colonialism and exploitative capitalism.

Good to know Amnesty is prepared to stand up for the most vulnerable people on earth - male sex buyers.

Fucks sake rhino, why don't you do some research? And don't pretend you don't know where to look. Someone who launches into MN with their first post being that Douglas Fox is a sex worker and defending IUSW is not a curious by-stander.

What is the significance of Douglas Fox being a "sex worker" if he is also a pimp? Is that like a get out of jail card? It's difficult to discredit the IUSW because it has no credibility to begin with. Trade unions do not include managers or owners for a reason.

"What do we think of the men who travel to parts of the world where they can easily access children?"

If you mean for sex, then personally I think they are pedos and should be charged and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law if they make any attempt to engage in sexual contact with a child.

But I don't see what that has to do with proposed laws which affect adults.

What is the significance of Douglas Fox being a "sex worker"

For starters since he is more qualified to speak on the subject than any of us here (except for DominaElle who is also a sex worker).

Sex workers (or whatever term you wish to use) are the people we should be listening to.

Domestic violence victims were/are unwilling to testify against their victims. They just changed the law so they didn't have to.

How many dv victims have you seen on the relationship board that regret not being with their abuser, now that they are out of that situation? I think I've seen one that was panicking, as it was ongoing at the time. Not one single person regrets it after they have come out the other side, and I
include myself in that.

Prostitutes that have exited seem to be behind the Nordic model, from what I have seen on twitter.

A different perspective from the outside than the inside, so it would seem.

rhinoceer I missed your point where you said I was being mean to you because I took umbrage at your claim that posters on this thread do not understand what "trafficking" means.

I still am surprised that you have not noticed regular articles in the papers about people being "freed" from various situations, and others being prosecuted for basically enslaving people. There have been some quite high profile cases. Including ones involving gangs in parts of the country. And those were cases around sex trafficking, although cases come to light across a range of forced work.

I find it shocking every single time there is another case.

We don't even know who wrote the invisible man site. It's a blog by an anonymous person with a series of quotes allegedly taken from Punternet. Why doesn't the site tell us where exactly on Punternet the alleged quotes can be found so we can check they aren't made up or if parts have been changed?

rhinoceer you have clearly not read that scottish report, hence you have taken my comment out of context.

It might help if you read it.

Oh great and now the call to arms has gone out.

Buffythereasinable feminist: what motivates clients to seek out the services of sex workers?

Many clients want a mature adult provider. Many clients are horrified at the thought of human trafficking and are NOT ok with patronizing a provider who is trafficked despite the common rhetoric.

Some providers specialize in seeing clients who are handicapped and or disabled. The film 'scarlet road a sex workers journey' beautifully depicts this reality. Why should these people be denied intimacy? One of the clients shown writes through his computer (he cannot talk) that he dreams of having a woman sleep all night next to him.

A desire for intimacy is extremely common and many clients sincerely desire real intimacy which goes well beyond a desire to penetrate a hole.

It's pretty easy to marginalize clients and their motives isn't it? Just as it has been easy to ignore the voices of consensual sex workers. Only in recent years do we have more and more sex workers standing up and of course the previous lack of advocacy was greatly due to the illegal status of commercial sex. Who wants to risk everything? This is why clients have been afraid to speak up.

Somehow a desire for sexual intimacy is ok as long as you aren't willing to pay for it. Paying instantly degrades it in the minds of many. This is really too bad.

Not to mention there are healthy providers who are working within healthy framework and they will not tolerate anything less from their clients. I am one of those people. My clients respect me and honor me or they don't get to be in my presence. I have seen lives change for the better. I have been proud to facilitate such scenarios. It isn't just sex that many clients seek. They seek candid conversation, touch, warmth, I've seen clients who had not experienced touch in many years. Some clients want to develop confidence with a pro before fumbling in a relationship. Some clients are married to women who are terminally ill and cannot provide them with intimacy. They won't leave their wives. Sex is an awesome stress reliever. Loneliness is another motive. There are lots of motives.

Why is it unreasonable and wrong- when there are providers who really do want to facilitate for clients in this context? Providers who are not being forced to any degree whatsoever?

There are even providers who started out with less than healthy circumstances who ended up thriving doing sex work having discovered the healthy aspects I am explaining here. I am one of those providers.

I won't tolerate anything less.

Still no explanation how you two found this thread...

fuck - imagine using as a defence a guy who sleeps with a prostitute while his wife lies on her deathbed

"For starters since he is more qualified to speak on the subject than any of us here (except for DominaElle who is also a sex worker)."

So only pimps and those currently working in prostitution are qualified to speak? Domina is an anonymous person typing words on a page but since you seem to think you can ascertain the qualifications of everyone else working here to speak on this topic, I'm not surprised that you have problems with this concept.

This thread is to discuss AI. There are lots of threads that have already covered your basic points. You are derailing this discussion by raising these here. If you want a basic education about prostitution, why don't you read some of the other threads or start your own.

AI's behaviour is truly disgraceful here. Even today, the policy organiser from the global unit in London told the NIA committee that the paper published by Julie Bindel is only the beginning of a comprehensive consultation and investigation with no firm time lines that they expect to be completed in this calendar year. But AI's website yesterday says the deadline for submissions is 21 March! 7 weeks! And they had the cheek to tell NIA that they were not doing enough research to come to any kind of conclusions.

What flora said.

This is a derailment of the thread.

There is a difference between trafficking culture and consensual sex work culture. In the years since I started sex work (2001) I have never witnessed a single incident of trafficking. I have never witnessed anyone underage and you better believe I would have done something. Human trafficking is a horrible thing that happens all over the planet and I am very concerned about child exploitation and child porn which in my opinion is happening at epidemic proportions! Though attacking sex workers and their clients in order to address these other issues sure seems bazaar to me. Why not specifically go after child predators and human traffickers instead of focusing on adults seeking adults? Sorry I just don't see how that is effective. You aren't saving children by arresting adults seeking adults.

I believe that many here refuse to acknowledge a difference between human slavery and CONSENSUAL sex work. I believe you are wiling to conflate the topics simply because you want to see them as the same.

I think some of you want to punish sex workers despite your talk of only going after buyers. This is evident when you support the criminalization of commercial sex. Bottom line sex workers ARE being arrested and harmed by the laws, by anti trafficking campaigns, by the anti prostitution rhetoric which generates further marginalization and stigmatization. If you people truly held sex workers as victims why are you ok with them being arrested and ground up by the legal system? Shouldn't they be treated as victims?

Where is the logic?

Because Domina, people who pay for sex don't care about the person they are paying, just the sensation. It may seem harmless enough to someone like you who meets decent people and is in it through choice. But that mindset is a very dangerous one when extrapolated to the more commonplace scenarios. How can it not be?

I think some of you want to punish sex workers despite your talk of only going after buyers.

Nonsense. Read the thread.

rhino

I've just had the misfortune to spend 10 mins on the uk punternet website. Just go to reviews, type in the name of a city (london) and only read the ones that say no in the recommend box.

Believe me, you will see they are not made up. Loved this little gem-

'She seemed even more annoyed at me that i wasnt getting hard despite her feeble and outright offensive attempt to entertain me, I lost it then and just asked out right what the fucking hell was wrong with her. Told her that she was like a different person to last time and that her attitude was awful and i didnt want to carry on with the visit and asked for my money back. She said that i couldnt but after some arguing agreed to get 20 back so i'd paid for half an hour rather than the hour which i was surprised she actually gave me. Got dressed, went home, had a shower and gave the missus a good seeing to so not a complete loss.'

Lucky missus.

I thought upthread somewhere there was a link from AI saying that anyone could comment?

They are all over the shop with this aren't they.

I still can't believe Amnesty is doing this. Amnesty! The great human right's organisation!

So Domina what you're telling us is that you have little relevant experience. Your "testimony" that because you haven't seen it, it doesn't exist would not be accepted even if you were not an anonymous somebody typing on a website.

I was struck watching the NIA Committee proceedings that the woman from UglyMugs and a previous pro-decrim woman both said to the Committee that they had never met a woman who had been coerced or trafficked (although this was contradicted by stating that technically everyone could be trafficked). I assume they say this because they think it is evidence that coercion or trafficking are not as wide-spread as others might say. However all it does is suggest they don't know very much about the topic they are supposedly qualified to give evidence about to a parliamentary committee. I expect the echo-chamber of pimps and punters they inhabit must encourage them that this is a valuable contribution because they are "qualified" to speak as "sex workers" and everyone else is not, as Rhino confirms.

I drive a lot. I have never seen two cars collide head on. Really you guys, it doesn't happen, or not as much as you think... Do you see how that doesn't work?