'Forced prostitution' BBC article

[MrsTerryPratchett]

Human traffickers jailed over Manchester forced prostitution

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-38861805

What I can't understand is how this article can be written without any mention of rape, which is what happened repeatedly to these women. And how no one appears to care that hundreds of men paid coerced women and no one asks about what consent consists of.

Is there no onus on men to find out if the women whose bodies they are using are even consenting according to the pathetically low standards of sex work? The idea that men using prostitutes don't have to worry about sex slavery is repulsive.

Yes, that was how I understood it too Mostly. I think they beefed up the SOA 2003 to try to make punters liable for raping women forced into prostitution? Though it's still not counted as rape per se. But it is a separate sexual offence to "pay for sexual services of a prostitute subjected to force" and it's supposed to be irrelevant "whether A (punter) is, or ought to be, aware that C (pimp, trafficker) has engaged in exploitative conduct".

Section 53a Sexual Offences Act 2003.

In reality though it doesn't get prosecuted. And I don't think even where it does that it carries a custodial sentence.

I've actually found a list online (on pc and I'm on mobile so tricky to link)

Between 2010 when the law was first enacted and 2015 there were 58 prosecutions (not necessarily convictions) of which 40 were in the first year. In 2013 there were none, and 2014 there were only 3.

The site is thefeministahood if anyone wants to google.

Cross posted with other posters.

Re why it doesn't get prosecuted, the site I've quoted below puts forward some other ideas:

The law is ineffective because it requires a considerable amount of police work to prove to the standard of proof required by the criminal courts that the woman has been forced, coerced or deceived. But the maximum sentence is only a level 3 fine and the police do not invest many resources into investigating offences that carry such a low penalty.

She goes on to say that it was basically lip service to keep women's rights activists happy.

The law is ineffective because it requires a considerable amount of police work to prove to the standard of proof required by the criminal courts that the woman has been forced, coerced or deceived

So a clear argument for introducing strict liability. All purchased sex is illegal- no need to prove whether or not there was coercion.

I for one would be happy with that, Lass.

Me too. But in this case there is clear, criminal prosecution level, proof of coercion. So fines all round, right?

On BBC news today.

Thirty 'pop-up brothels' appear in Swindon each week - www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-wiltshire-38841587

You would think so, wouldn't you, Mrs TP?

The men that use prostitutes obviously don't care.

I've only just seen this thread - well, actually I read the news article which led me to here.
I think there is a lot of misconceptions about not only prostitutes but also the extent of it. That's women who are forced into prostitution.
Just read a book this weekend by a woman called Carol Thomas, Pure Purgatory in Portugal, about how an English woman was forced into prostitution and not only how the authorities wouldn't help (European and national) but also how she was not a typical victim - but she was turned into one.

I'll try and put a link in but the system might not let me. It's a strange story because you really don't think much untoward is going on at the start and then it builds and builds until she's slap bang in the middle.

Very worrying situation about what's really going on.
www.amazon.com/Pure-Purgatory-Portugal-prostitution-conspiracy-ebook/dp/B01N7Z8EDB/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1488804810&sr=1-1&keywords=carol+thomas+portugal&tag=mumsnetforum-21

There is a new law going through here in the Netherlands that makes it a criminal offense to have sex with anyone you reasonably expect could have been trafficked.

The UK passed that about 10 years ago. Zero convictions since it's basically impossible to enforce.

The term "Pay to rape" would be more accurate than "Forced prostitution".

There is a new law going through here in the Netherlands that makes it a criminal offense to have sex with anyone you reasonably expect could have been trafficked

I would not have thought it were that difficult for a punter to identify where there is a possibility a woman has been trafficked. But, unless the police catch them on a raid I doubt tracking down punters would be feasible.

The answer must then be buying sex is a strict liability offence and facilitating the sale of sex is a strict liability offence.

I would be for making it completely illegal to buy sex. I would not want to see the vulnerable people selling sex being the ones who end up with the punishment, so I'm not clear on if it should be illegal to sell sex - other than as a pimp. I don't know how the law works with things like this, though, so I'm happy to be educated by posters who know more.

In the U.K it is legal to sell and buy sex except Northern Ireland where it is illegal to buy.

An activity facilitating the sale of sex such as brothels, pimps, madams, "minders", "maids" is illegal.

The pro punter lobby will tell you this disadvantages the notion of a cosy collective of 2 or 3 women sharing a flat for mutual protection - with a nice muscled chap there for backup and/or an older retired prostitute to give help to the younger women.

The reality is more likely shifts of women operating 24 hours out of a flat paying substantial shares to pimps and madame.

It would seem to make more sense for it to be illegal to buy and sell but to have sort of the reverse of how it seems to work with drugs - people buying not treated as harshly as dealers - so those selling sex would be more likely to end up with help than a record, and those buying would face the full force of the law. However, as I say, how easy it would be to prosecute those selling vs those buying would probably add a slant onto what was fair.

I definitely think buying should be illegal. But then how would we deal with men who buy sex from people being trafficked or who are under the age of consent? Would the fact that it's an illegal act in itself have any effect on greater punishments for such acts?