Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

The greens and prostitutes

807 replies

IceBeing · 04/03/2015 21:21

Be gentle as I am new to thinking about this.

I found the Natalie Bennett's comments on decriminalising prostitution pretty persuasive - what am I missing?

She basically said that sex workers would like this policy (having contributed to it) and that research from other countries indicated it was the way forward.

OP posts:
fayyive · 22/03/2015 22:21

"I wonder who is paying for that."

Laura Lee and sexworker activist groups don't receive any Government funding. She has to use the money she earns herself or from donations (eg Crowdfunding).

LL has over 20 years experience selling sex in brothels and 1:1 with clients either at her home or theirs.

I can't find a link but I remember she got fired from her job (in a bank I think) only because they found out she was a prostitute. She spent years and much of her own finances fighting the case for unfair dismissal and eventually lost. She's also had dog s**t put through her letterbox (not by a client but by someone opposed to prostitution). Still think she's privileged and sexwork campaign groups aren't needed?

fayyive · 22/03/2015 22:22

"Sex worker campaigns groups are all over the place, and very well funded."

What makes you think they are "very well funded"?

fayyive · 22/03/2015 22:28

Rachel Moran on the other hand receives Government funding, and this link alleges she at one point had it put the money meant for her charity into her own personal account (if that is the case, is that actually legal?)

maggiemcneill.wordpress.com/2014/04/08/slush-fund/

ChopperGordino · 22/03/2015 22:35

Yes yes, got it, you must defend the right of men to have access to the bodies of others at all costs

YonicScrewdriver · 22/03/2015 22:35

HOUSE!

whoopsbunny · 22/03/2015 22:35

fayyive, are you our little returning pbu? Aw. I've missed you xxxxx

You come out with all the same arguments as to why you should legally be allowed to buy access to women's bodies. You seem to know a lot about Laura Lee.

We know they're well funded because they're funded on the back of "sex workers" - aka pimps. People like the abhorrent Douglas Fox and his partner.

fayyive · 22/03/2015 22:43

They are "sex workers" ie they sell sex.

YonicScrewdriver · 22/03/2015 22:48

You think a pimp is a sex worker?

whoopsbunny · 22/03/2015 22:50

Sex workers has become an umbrella term, it can also cover such people as porn film makers, escort company owners and so on. When it suits them, like. When it comes to the 'right' of the sex worker (who actually sells sex) to earn money selling sex and then give them a % of it.

fayyive · 22/03/2015 22:54

I don't think a pimp is a sex worker.

In the context of sex worker activist groups, sex workers are adults who sell sex and consider it "work" hence the term.

PuffinsAreFictitious · 22/03/2015 22:57

No, in the context of "sex worker activist groups" pimps are included as "sex workers".

They often run the groups.

ChopperGordino · 22/03/2015 22:59

It's all just diversion away from the fact that there are a lot of men who want to cling on to their belief that they must be able to access other people's bodies whenever they want

YonicScrewdriver · 22/03/2015 23:00

It seemed like you were saying Douglas Fox was a sex worker.

fayyive · 22/03/2015 23:07

DF does indeed sell sexual services.

YonicScrewdriver · 22/03/2015 23:12

Doesn't he sell access to other people's bodies? Or does he sell access to his own too

fayyive · 22/03/2015 23:14

His own.

And for the record his partner owns an escort agency, not himself.

PuffinsAreFictitious · 22/03/2015 23:14

He and his partner run an escort agency that was featured on TV. He claims that pimps are sex workers too. He is the main activist for IUSW

FloraFox · 22/03/2015 23:27

Didn't Laura Lee tell the NI committee that IUSW has 10 members and that includes pimps?

I've seen video of Douglas Fox and it's hard to imagine he has built a fortune selling himself.

fayyive · 22/03/2015 23:57

I don't even think DF's partner is a member of IUSW.

If this is all you've got (one prostitute member having a partner who has an escort agency) then it comes across as straw clutching in your attempts tp discredit all the groups (there are also others) made up of prostitutes who support decriminalisation.

whoopsbunny · 23/03/2015 00:04

Yes he is - it all came out during the amnesty debacle.

But, on balance, regardless of what Douglas and escort agency partner say, I'll go with the Swedish police - the nordic model reduces all types of prostituion, but mainly targets trafficking - ie those doing it against their will, and those criminal gangs in the exploitation of women and children. That's good enough for me - the Laura Lees of this world are on their own.

PuffinsAreFictitious · 23/03/2015 00:12

Oh no, I have more.

I might even reference them tomorrow morning.

fayyive · 23/03/2015 00:25

" it all came out during the amnesty debacle."

Both Amnesty Int and DF have denied DF had any involvment on Amnesty Int's decision to advocate for decriminalisation.

fayyive · 23/03/2015 00:32

" the nordic model reduces all types of prostituion"

You mean street prostitution only? And the model was introduced in 1999- around the time the internet started to become available for households. Do you think escort internet bookings may have contributed to a reduction in street prostitution?

"but mainly targets trafficking - ie those doing it against their will, and those criminal gangs in the exploitation of women and children."

The police consider ALL prostitutes to be trafficked, the problem with that approach IMO it means the ones which really are trafficked won't be getting any priority over the ones who aren't.

fayyive · 23/03/2015 00:40

video linked by whoopsbunny

So this is how the Swedish cops spend their time.

First they find prostitutes just like clients do by finding online profiles with Google, then they find the prostitute's address- he doesn't say how but I'm guessing a male cop calls the number posing as a client and makes a false booking to trick the prostitute into parting with her address.

Then the police drive to the building and spend hours watching it for men going in and coming out.

Evidence they use includes text messages which mention payment for sex, payment for sex conversations overheard by the police or "sexual noises" overheard by police.

If there is evidence the suspect is offered the choice of paying a small fine and being sent on their way or going to trial (most choose to just pay the fine).

Which means all clients have to do is not mention payment for sex while using his phone for the booking and keep the windows closed with music on so "sexual noises" can't be overheard and then there's nothing the cops can do.

And while the cop didn't say in this video I would imagine the prostitute would soon be getting a visit soon from social services who may want to remove any young children she has. Her landlord would also be exposed who would have to evict her by law.

So who does the law hurt more? Those who sell sex, or those who pay for it?

whoopsbunny · 23/03/2015 00:41

You didn't watch or listen to the source you asked me for at all, did you?

What's the point of asking me the source of what I write in posts if youdon't listen it? It's a 10min conference talk - surely you have the time if you'e on here and know so much about douglas Fox?

And despite both Df and AI denying any influence on their policy - it came out then that DF and DF's partner were part of IUSW.

Swipe left for the next trending thread