For f##ks sake - -
just legalise it already and move on to crimes that actually harm society.
West Yorkshire Police have sought to clarify a senior officer's remarks after she called for a database of all men who use prostitutes, irrespective of whether or not a crime has been committed. Chief Superintendent Alison Rose from Bradford South said in a report by the BBC that she wanted to set up a DNA database of men who …
Whilst I agree with your sentiments, as I've pointed out in previous posts on this subject, prostitution itself is *not* illegal, it's just so much that surrounds it that is.
The fact is, however, that kerb crawling, especially when it happens in or near residential areas, is a problem for local people, but the solution is not to criminalise the women or the punters, but to make it easier for women to be able to advertise their services via the web etc and allow them to work in premises with appropriate protection and security to ensure their safety thus making kerb crawling unnecessary in the first place.
On the face of it, prostitution doesn't do any harm. And I have no strong opinion either way, but I recall a rather brilliant line from the West Wing:
"I know of no little girl, and neither do you, who says 'I wanna be a prostitute when I grow up.' They do it because they're forced to out of economic circumstances. And dire economic need is a form of coercion"
Just floating an opposing view though... No need to flame people.
Do little kids say they want to be the garbage man? Probably not. They become garbage men because they're forced to out of economic circumstances. And dire economic need is a form of coercion.
While your argument isn't without merit I think it could be applied to anyone of any gender (you specifically cited "little girls") in any job or career they really don't want to be in.
You do realise it is sometimes OK to be gender-specific without adding a disclaimer that ofcoursethiscouldbeapplied etc etc? I don't see people blustering out a list of other international conflicts of which they are mindful when making reference to the Middle East, lest they be accused of bias or bigotry.
Also, while your argument is not without merit, garbage men are not obliged to let strangers fuck them in the arse.
I'm sorry, but really, you should be more careful.
Garbage men are not obliged to let strangers fuck them for a few minutes for a relatively large hourly rate.. but neither are prostitutes obliged to virtually swim in shed loads of baby diapers and used tampons for hours at a time for a much more modest hourly rate.
If the women are not being literally forced (as opposed to "coerced by economic conditions") then it is simply a career choice; there are others, but they don't pay as well.
The same arguement (about economic conditions) applies, literally, to almost all people who do some sort of work. There are those of us who enjoy our work, but, even we, ultimately, would probably do something else (even if ever so slightly different) if it were not that we needed a paycheck.
Indeed, Ms. Bee, would you be trolling these comments being forced to have your mind soiled if it were not that you would like to receive your paycheck? Wouldn't it be better if you could just read them after the most extreme comments were already eliminated?
and a hooker able to put down roots, pay taxes, and develop a secure business without the threat of pimping, drugs, and lunacy wouldnt necessarily be obliged to either. when you can book in advance with some confidence, be sure that you wont be busted or smacked the fuck around, you're less likely to do-anything-for-the-money.
put it like this : If you, SB, didnt know if you were working next week, and someone said "can you photocopy this bunch of bullshit for 6 hours at a demeaning rate of pay" you'd be much more inclined to do it rather than tell them to go fuck themselves. Job security is more than just demand for what you're selling.
/Sidenote : yes, legalise the hell out of it. put sex workers in positions of security rather than desperation. no, it doesnt address the oh-my-god-these-poor-women malarkey, but then, if you want to address that societal illness, why not broaden your goal to "why is this industry so stigmatised, for both supplier and consumer?"
"Do little kids say they want to be the garbage man? Probably not. They become garbage men because they're forced to out of economic circumstances. And dire economic need is a form of coercion."
Ah, brilliantly argued.. Except to say that coercing someone into collecting the bins for a living is hardly amoral.
Like a lot of pithy sayings, it's just a little *too* pat. How can the speaker presume to know whether the person he's talking to knows such a little girl?
(Note that I'm not suggesting that such a thing would be good, especially for the girl: I just don't like presumptuous twits).
But if, as you suggest, women are coerced into prostitution because of their economic situation (and I'm not sure that that's always true), what do you propose they do instead? Starve?
Would it not be better to help them find better ways to cope?
I am being economically coerced into working in my job, this job has certain requirements which I dislike (regardless of the degree of unpleasantness) but I was aware of these when I took the job. I don't see how I can complain.
1. If I was forced to do my job it would be different.
2. If I was lied to about the role it would be different.
Back to prostitution:
In case 1. you do not address this by making prostitution illegal, there are arguments that this makes it worse as the whole industry is driven underground. Nor do you address it by making using trafficed prostitutes some sort of strict liability rape offence (a vaunted Labour initiative right up there with ending boom and bust in the all time fucking stupid stakes).
In case 2. if the prositute has not been physically forced to do the job they can leave (as I can in my job when they make me get in at 0830). If not, see point 1.
Whether or not prostitutes get 'fucked in the arse' is frankly irrelevant.
If the sex workers were to be collecting the 'samples' and providing them to the coppers, would that a) be legal under UK and continental privacy law, and would said sample b) be admissible before the court as evidence? After all, most encounters would seem to result in a sample inside a latex container...
This argument reeks of public name & shame practices that are popular in the USoA but I personally find very questionable. Trying to use a biometric detection tool as a deterrent is highly abusive of privacy and yet another vivid illustration why the government and the ACPO must not be allowed to have the database state. And perhaps why people holding positions of public trust ought not to be allowed to keep their positions if they continue to damage and destroy the public trust this way.
Why not just decriminalise prositution, licence it and go after the pimps and trafickers who are the real threat to vulnerable women?
Admitted, if legal, it raises the issue of women soliciting in inappropriate places (not that this doesn't already happen illegally). This is why we need a sensible licencing policy (licencing of the venue, or area, not necessarily of the sex workers).
Other countries can make this work perfectly well, is there any reason we need to live in the nineteenth century?
All in all, this woman sounds to me like a misandrist. In a day and age where misogeny is rightly looked down on by most people, we seem to turn a blind eye to the converse (a good example of this is the recent Boots advert where the women are carrying on as normal, but the 'poor darling' men have to stay in bed when they have a cold; swap the gender roles here and no doubt there would be outrage).
So people who use Prostitutes are rapists, murderers, robbers etc?? I take it that we live in an all encompassing society that woman who use Male Escorts would also have their DNA recorded?
"This proposal follows a not entirely dissimilar proposal by Deputy Chief Constable Simon Byrne, ACPO's lead on prostitution and sexual exploitation, at the end of last year. He would like to see the police setting up a database of “ugly mugs” "
Guess he has met SuBo's ugly sister aka Chief Superintendent Alison Rose then.
Steve because you know he wants your DNA record
the market for male escorts is very small, and very different to the female escort/prostitute one. don't believe most of the rubbish about websites that are seeking male escorts for their 'rapidly increasing user base', those are mainly set up to take a 50 quid starting fee from joe-easily-parted-from-his-money-blogs (and no, they have never parted me with mine ;)
I do however have a number of female friends who just so happen to be gay, and I do know that a few of those have made use of female prostitutes (you get to learn all sorts of strange things about people at late night parties). I would think that is the only female demographic that would be targeted for dna under this scheme (straight female's using male escorts, rare as it is, has other methods of 'soliciting').
Personally I find her DNA suggestion sickening and against all moral standard (unlike prostitution).
Anon, because I'm talking about friends, and while I don't mind standing behind my own assertions I believe in my friend's right to privacy.
So, "Deputy Chief Constable Simon Byrne, ACPO's lead on prostitution and sexual exploitation ... would like to see the police setting up a database of “ugly mugs” – or individuals believed to pose a risk to sex workers."
Individuals believed to pose a risk to sex workers? - Doesn't that mean all senior plod and a lot of moralising politicians?
There's easy ways to solve the problems.
Legalise voluntary prostitution. They'd pay tax like any other self-employed person. Maybe require licensing with regular health checks - that's an occupational hazard - and you'd get a public health benefit too. And that'd largely solve the problem of trafficked women.
Legalise multiple prostitutes working out of one building. Then not only can they hire security to protect themselves against violent clients, but they're also not out on the streets offending people by their existence, which is a double win.
And get properly tough on the blokes trafficking them. Hence the grenade...
>And that'd largely solve the problem of trafficked women
I'm afraid it wouldn't. I'm not sure of the exact legal position here in Spain but at the very least it's more than tolerated. You will often find a puticlub on the outskirts of an reasonably sized town. Also there are always numerous girls plying their wares on Calle de la Montera just outside a police station almost bang in the centre of Madrid . However trafficking still exists.
Now, now, Ms. Bee, you disappoint me; I expected better.
First of all, there's no reason to disconnect yourself from the esteemed intellectual centres of your own mind, and abase yourself by lowering your commentary standards to those of the chauvinist you are retorting against.
Secondly, as a "Reg commentard," as you put it, I am rather put off by your off-the-cuff effort to lump my brethren and me in with the likes of such rabble as Morphoyle. While my half of the species does, admittedly, have a reputation of objectifying the faire sex, as it were, the case is more often than not overblown, and seldom takes into consideration that men and women are, after all, different from each other.
And finally, being that you even deigned to post a reply, you must, of course, be including yourself as a target of your comments, are you not?
Maybe we're not so different, after all...
...that an El Reg'er would describe a large chunk of their customer base so?
I normally find your contribs to be quite witty, but not that one. In fact it's the sort of low standard I'd expect on an unmoderated forum, not a moderated news-site and especially not coming from a staffer.
Nowhere on the statute books is prostitution illegal. Many of the trappings of the oldest profession are illegal. For example running a brothel, or street-walking. But selling sex from a house where no-one else does so is totally legal. Tony Blair, in a rare act of doing something sensible, actually attempting to change the law so 2 or more prostitutes could work from the same house (for safety reasons), unfortunately, it fell off the legislative radar.
Someone who makes ACPO look rational.
Speaking of ACPO, I was very surprised recently to learn that they're not a statutory body. For all the press attention they get and access to ministers, they are nothing more than a private company. It's also exempt from the Freedom of Information Act.
and catch some ministers nuts on the way.
ACPO, as you point out, is not a statutory body, it is in fact a private company. However, since it's paid for by the state, it is a de facto arm of the state ... something I suspect a future ECHR ruling will make clear ... I hope so leastways.
Can't remember if it was ACPO or one of the things they were running (what was effectively the national riot squad during the UK miners strike in 1984) but they were described as have "As much legal standing as a stamp club."
Most stamp clubs however do not issue (or expect to have followed) guidelines on DNA retention following arrest.
"I think there's a real gap in the law around taking DNA from men that use women for sex. "
This sums up the whole 'problem' with prostitution.
It's always seams to be portrayed as wicked men taking advantage of vulnerable women.
What about male prostitutes, oh they are called gigolos not prostitutes, a word with a completely different set of connotations attached to it.
So in the case of a woman visiting a gigolo it's a strong woman exercising her right to experiment with her sexuality.
When a man visits a prostitute it's a pervert taking advantage of a vulnerable woman.
What ever happened to sexual equality?
This is the same force who recently sent a letter to the employer of a woman claiming her company car had been observed kerb crawling.
In fact the woman had been visiting her amateur dramatic group for rehersals as she had done every wednesday evening for several years. The am dram rehersal rooms just happen to be in a red light area.
In their defence the police claimed that vehicles were carefully observed over a period of time before these letters were sent out. This is clearly a huge crock of shit. If they were "carefully observing" the vehicles in question while they were kerb crawling there would be no need to send out a letter to the registered keeper of the vehicle, they could approach the driver at the time.
If you want to stop kerb crawling then there is a simple solution, which not only reduces kerb crawling but protects prostitutes and increases tax revenue. Introduce licensed brothels and outlaw prostitution outside those brothels.
Obviously there would still be unlicensed prostitutes and their pimps and all the associated trouble, but it would be much reduced and if all unlicensed prostitution were illegal and procuring a prostitute outside of a licensed brothel were made illegal then kerb crawling would be greatly reduced.
I once had to pull over because my windshield had fogged over. As I was wiping the windscreen, I had a knock on the window and Copper lent in and informed that I was being knicked for kerb-crawling. No amount of protests to the copper that I had to pull over was accepted until I explained thad I had been visiting the nearby Army base for a Mess dinner and so had a perfectly ligitimate reason to be there at that time of night.
The copper asked for names of anyone at the dinner so they could check my story, so i supplied him one - his Chief Constable.
The look on his face still brings a grin to mine.
If a women of her own choice and of a legal age "sell's her favours" , I can't for one see the problem. Its her body not the states. The so called moral aspects of the oldest profession should have been left back with the Victorians.
Bring prostitution out in the open with checks to make sure the ladies are doing it of their own choice and leave it at that.
The police picked me up while I was sitting at a bus stop, waiting for a bus. I was charged with 'being drunk in the highway', I had done exactly nothing except go to the pub and wait for the bus. I refused the DNA test but agreed to be finger printed so I could get home.
The only use of DNA I would advocate is if a prostitute is attacked or killed and you have DNA from the crime, you could then compare it against people you arrest for curb crawling. But importantly you don't get to keep the DNA in a database afterwards. And you would only use DNA from an attack case that is otherwise going nowhere. So purely as another way of getting a prostitute abuser of the street.
Otherwise no matter my stand on prostitution I don't support the taking of DNA as defined in the article. Taking DNA as a deterrent I don't support. Taking DNA should be a tool not a weapon.....
Why dont the Police try solving some real crime for a change.
Have you ever been visited by the boys in blue if you are unlucy enough to have your house burgled. They could not give a stuff.
Had your credit card stolen. Not interested.
But two consentining people having sex, my god call the riot squad.
I think as usual this is an ambitious copper trying to get some publicity in order to get promoted.
The real criminals are all in a big sandy coloured builing on the Thames next to a giant clock tower, go check that out.
And just as idiotic....
(argument subject to certain age limitations),
a. Show a film on TV of an illegal act of a woman being stabbed with a knife - Carry on Sir
b. Show a film on TV of a legal act of a consentual dick penetrating a consentual vagina - Risk of horses bolting in the street and moral breadown of society.
Moral Logic. What's that then?
Statement -> "going with a sex worker is unlawful in some circumstances, but not all".
Therefore -> taking DNA from everyone who has sex with a sex worker implies that the police will be taking DNA from people who may not have broken the law.
The statements are gender neutral, it is not possible deduce that sex with a woman is a crime.
to deduce that sex with a women is a crime try this :-
Sex with sex workers is illegal
All women are sex workers,
Therefore sex with women is a crime.
Every time a John has sex with a woman he gets arrested
John got arrested
John may have had sex with a woman.
Or just for fun:-
Posting anonymous I don't see your name.
You don't see my name
I may be you
Of course that's just a joke, since what is money for but to exchange for sex, in one way or another.
The problem at the moment is there's loads of men who know that the solution is to legalise prostitution, but they daren't say so, because there's a few very vocal feminists, who believe that a man with free time, is a sign he isn't doing enough for women. Harman, is just one of many.
The irony is that men have protected women for millennia, and have a much better idea of how to do it than raving feminists do, because men understand who they're protecting them from. The men doing the protecting have at least an understanding that witholding booty from some men will result in them being down the park with a hammer. When they inadvertently cause this to happen with their bizarre ideas, Harman and her ilk just think this is a sign all men are like that.
We should just ignore the loony brigade, and legalise it so the police can protect these women.
When is the UK government going to rein in this commercial outfit that seems to dictate policy rather than the Home Office doing what it's duty is?
ACPO even sells police data, with the profits going to ACPO, and sources 'experts' for certain court cases. Talk about prejudicial, biased witnesses.
Why does Chief Superintendent Alison Rose think that the Yorkshire or any Plod outfit can defeat human nature / or a history measured in centuries? As for her statement: 'they would obviously be removed from any database' she is either smoking some funny stuff or deliberately lying. Plod is like most people, why destroy data?
Prostitution, pers se, is a victimless crime as two parties come to a commercial agreement and consummate it. I am not referring to juvenile hookers. If the trade was liberalised to modify the business end, pimps and procurers would lose their hold.
Once again Plod seeks to govern the people it allegedly 'serves' by imposing it's idea of morals on people. Plod should concentrate on real crime, not just filling databases and creating statistics.
If there is a neighbourhood problem with hookers, go create them a neighbourhood in an industrial park so that in-town neighbourhoods will be freed up from the circular driving patterns of potential purchasers and the sordid reputation resulting from the world's oldest trade. Works in other countries, why not the UK?
Likely because of the Plod attitude.
You seem to be taking out your fury at the moderated comments on people whose comments are fairly mundane. I understand your point of view that some women are "forced" into prostitution and "have to let strangers fuck them in the ass." What I want to know though is why is "'having' to do something unpleasant that is sexual" so obviously much more terrible then "'having' to do something unpleasant that is non of a sexual nature?"
What is it about sex that makes it so horrible in your mind? I can safely say that I would rather have a job wherein I had sex with strangers than I would a job in which I worked in a massive composting facility. Or in the sewers. Or out in the burning sun on a hot tarmac all day.
To my way of thinking, so long as the clients in question are properly vetted and screened (I.E. they are not carriers of sexually transmittable diseases), as well as proper anti-pregnancy precautions taken, then being a prostitute would be among my more enjoyable choices of occupations. It’s a good work out, you meet all sorts of people, you get to experience the more eclectic bits of people’s psyches and have your worldview tilted at periodically. It would be both physical and mental exercise…but you get paid for it! Even better, you might even enjoy the odd session or two.
Now the arguments against prostitution that I have heard which I consider largely legitimate boil down to “most prostitutes don’t have a way of properly vetting their customers.” This isn’t because the technology doesn’t exist to do so…but rather that we have so stigmatised the activity that prostitutes cannot form a proper guild, set up a proper baudy house and enforce rules such as pre-vetting. If we collectively got over ourselves on this issue and allowed prostitution to be treated as a real profession then the arguments based upon customer selection (or enforcement of “house rules”) go away: you play by the rules or you are blackballed forever.
I guess the difference is that between a “whore” and a “companion” (Firefly reference.) If we allowed our prostitutes to become “companions” as opposed to forcing them to be “whores” then I honestly cannot see what the problem with prostitution is. Is it the act of sex itself you find so upsetting? The concept of money being involved?
I don’t understand why prostitutes shouldn’t be allowed to be proper professionals with full control over their client list, proper security, health benefits, insurance and proper treatment from the authorities. If you have a John who breaks the rules in any way – tries to abuse the women, cheat the blood screenings, whatever – I suggest you nail the sick fuck to the nearest lamp post, cover him in sugar water and set the ants upon him.
If, however, the man is playing by the rules and the lady is consenting and being paid well for her time…where exactly is the harm? How – please describe it in simple words, because I obviously am a dense idiot – how exactly is it any more demeaning to have sex with someone for money in a professional circumstance and setting than it is to have a job being waste-high in shit running fibre optic cable through a goddamned hole in the ground?
Er, that's not what I was disgusted by, and I think you're confusing someone else's comments with mine. I was disgusted by some of the same nasty crap that always issues forth here whenever a woman says or does something a bit daft - she's inevitably a bitch, and an ugly bitch, she's probably bitter because no one wants to fuck her, etc etc. And like I said, you haven't seen the ones I nixed.
I don't know why you assume I'm anti-prostitution, but thanks for that anyway.
It really is like a piece-o-work convention in here every time there's a story like this.
I apologise. I did get the sense you were deeply anti-prostitution. I can't speak for other commenttards, but I generally figure that when /anyone/ (regardless of gender) does something "a bit daft" it is either because they made a miscalculation and chose the wrong option or they are suffering from a neurochemical imbalance. (Altered neurotransmitter levels, hormone levels out of whack or even mineral deficiencies.) Alternately, it can be environmental: they could have been raised in such a strongly fundamentalist or passionately genderist/racist/nationalist/you-name-it that “belief” became more important to them than “reason” at some early point in their lives.
You are also correct in that I haven't seen the ones you nixed. I wonder though sometimes if you shouldn't let them through periodically. Not because of any sense of "freedom of speech" or other nonsense...but so that commenters with sense can tear the bastards a new one.
As bad as some people are...I do think that the /majority/ of us aren't that far gone. I would like to think that if any one of us were truly espousing a genderist viewpoint the rest would ridicule and shun the socio-political troglodyte. Hopefully enough to leave them so shamed that they actually consider for a half an instant rethinking their approach to gender relations.
As disheartening as it most likely is to read the chauvinistic tripe that occurs in these threads, I would hope there is some relief to be found in the fact that – overall – we just don’t put up with that kind of crap here.
Or maybe I don’t know what I’m talking about at all. Maybe I need some education. Would you consider doing an article about it? Carefully editing some of the worst of the worst comments and discussing with us what it is like to be a moderator in such circumstances? Especially from the standpoint of being a woman and reading what I can only imagine are some of the “worst the internet has to offer” chauvinistic comments? Even the most accepting and open among us periodically need a reminder of why it is important to treat others equally, accept differences and keep an open mind.
I know it’s not your job to help us all grow up and act like mature individuals…but if not you, then who*? For this particular group of soulless twats, you seem as likely to knock sense into our heads as anyone else…
*(Jane Fae would probably be qualified to give us all a smack upside the head too.)
>I can safely say that I would rather have a job wherein I had sex with strangers
You really are off your rocker.
Oh, I see, you then qualify your statement with a plethora of idealistic twaddle about only doing so providing you can choose the ideal client.
You're more off your rocker than I previously thought and I suspect your home address is somewhere in cloud cuckoo land.
Let's put a counter argument, I would rather work as a garbage collect if I could only collect garbage that had been pre-washed, placed in hermetically sealed bags and each pack didn't weigh more than 10Kg.
Back in the real world, just as you wouldn't be able to hold down a job as a garbage collector with such conditions, neither would a prostitute who wanted your terms.
In reality the girls on the street probably have to service a large number of clients with a considerably less than average standard of personal hygiene requesting all manner of acts which might otherwise be acceptable between two clean consenting adults. Decriminalisation won't change this as some seem to think.
There are places in this world where ladies have the ability to properly pre-vet their clientele. I live in one. Escort agencies are licensed...and all new clients of these agencies have to go through a fairly rigorous screening before they may engage one of the ladies for a night's companionship. The tests can take up to two weeks, so it tends to be a reduce a lot of the spur-of-the-moment type pick-ups. I happen to be good friends with a couple of ladies who work in one of these agencies. (Friends since childhood.) They make quite good money, despite all the hoops they make clients go through.
The ladies working the street corners – usually baked out of their skulls on meth – don’t make nearly as much and they tend to die young. Those girls are being taken advantage of by pimps and the worst kind of johns. Those girls need all the protection we can give: rehabilitation programs, shelters, social services to help them start over. They need protection from vengeful pimps, counselling and proper medical care.
Both worlds exist in my city…but it has given me an understanding of why some ladies would choose prostitution voluntarily. In the right circumstances, with the right legalisation, it is just as valid a job as any other. Better in a lot of cases than many. It can be a very highly paid job that is less “dirty” or “demeaning” than many I could name. am sorry you can’t see past your own stigmatisation and prejudices long enough to see this.
Prostitution can be horrible and demeaning. It can also be a perfectly professional occupation. Decriminalisation won’t automatically change the darker side of prostitution into the kind of lifestyle my friends enjoy. What it does do however is draw a very stark and clear line between those who chose to go into the profession and those who were coerced. Those who chose it get paid rates similar to lawyers, work in similar buildings, have proper security, receptionists and an entire back office of staff.
Those who don’t hook on street corners and die young. Maybe if you decriminalised it in your society you would start to see the same stratification. Then you would be able to tell fairly easily which ladies actually “need help” and which were doing just fine, thank you very much, and require neither “help” nor condescension.
Not all prostitution occurs because the woman was “coerced” or “forced” into it. Although I will admit that in backwards, repressive societies it is far more likely to be so than in societies which allow women to make their own choices about their own bodies.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2020