The Growing Demand for Prostitution

gargleblaster

Interesting article. Long but worth reading IMO. It mainly focuses on the findings of one researcher who comes down clearly one one side of this issue - so before anyone cries foul, that's a given.

The John Next Door
http://www.newsweek.com/2011/07/17/the-growing-demand-for-prostitution.html

From the last page of the article:

Striking developments abroad are also influencing policies in the United States. In 1999 Sweden decided that prostitution was a form of violence against women and made it a crime to buy sex, although not to sell it. This approach dramatically reduced trafficking, whereas the legalization of prostitution in the Netherlands, Germany, and much of Australia led to an explosive growth in demand that generated an increase in trafficking and other crimes. Sweden’s success in dealing with the problem has persuaded other countries to follow suit. “The Swedish model passed in South Korea, Norway, and Iceland, and has been introduced in Israel and Mexico,” says Ramos.

Despite the struggle to control it, human trafficking is often described as the fastest-growing criminal enterprise in the world, and as second only to drug trafficking in its profitability. With billions of dollars at stake, the campaign against sexual exploitation has also provoked a predictable backlash. Last year Craigslist shut down its “adult” classified-ads section in response to the antitrafficking campaign led by Malika Saada Saar, founder of the Rebecca Project for Human Rights. The Craigslist crackdown increased revenue at Backpage.com, where The Village Voice runs its own adult ads.

Clearly worried about growing social pressure, the Voice attacked the antitrafficking campaign last month, charging that it has exaggerated the extent of the problem. The most common estimates, oft-repeated by major media, suggest that 100,000 to 300,000 children are trafficked in the United States every year. The Voice reported that this statistic identifies children at risk and claimed that the number of those who are actually trafficked is only a fraction of those figures. But the Voice’s calculations were promptly dismissed as unreliable; Seattle’s mayor and police chief pointed out that their city alone is estimated to have hundreds of minors exploited for commercial sex, and they accused Backpage.com of acting as an “accelerant” of underage sex trafficking.

The Voice also ridiculed Real Men Don’t Buy Girls, the antitrafficking video campaign launched earlier this year by Demi Moore and Ashton Kutcher with a series of public-service ads featuring Justin Timberlake, Sean Penn, Bradley Cooper, and Jamie Foxx. The ads reflect a growing recognition that men are the key to addressing this problem.

Hazys

In 1999 Sweden decided that prostitution was a form of violence against women and made it a crime to buy sex, although not to sell it. This approach dramatically reduced trafficking, whereas the legalization of prostitution in the Netherlands, Germany, and much of Australia led to an explosive growth in demand that generated an increase in trafficking and other crimes.

Not to belittle some of the terrible lives lead by some sex workers, but this article reaks of BS to me. There are no facts or figures in the article or do they explain the methods they used to arrive at this conclusion. I'd like to see how they back up the statements i quoted above.

This article reads like the opinion of some radical christian group pushing their agenda rather than an article that is there to find the truth about a situation and then propose a workable solution (which will more than likely will go against their religious beliefs)


EDIT: Sorry i only read the article not your comment. I must ask why post this BS article, if you want an intelligent debate as it will only enforce stereotypes?

It mainly focuses on the findings of one researcher who comes down clearly one one side of this issue - so before anyone cries foul, that's a given.

gbee

I don't know how it is illegal to 'buy' sex and no illegal to 'sell sex'

So does that mean i have to wait for the lady of the night to arrive at my car door, my flat or hotel room.

And if she happens to be black can I refuse her? Will she start playing the racist card like the Taxi Drivers?

Hazys

This quote from a poster on the article sums up the article nicely:

Cmorhoun

I just completed a study and the results are scandalous and therefore meet the standards to be published in Newsweek.

The study shows that all women who don’t enjoy sex actually have a lower IQ and as a result, think that all prostitution is rape and all men who pay for sex (which includes downloading a video) won’t give a second thought to trafficking children.

The study was conducted by watching the comments on an article written to serve the agenda of an advocacy group that specializes in creating dangerous stereotypes and myths to secure more funding for their cause.

Now don’t bother questioning my results….I’m calling it research so, it’s fact My “research methods” are not disclosed to anyone other than Newsweek, (my sellout publisher) and it was not scrutinized in any way…but again, it’s research…so it’s fact.

Now the logical reaction should be to debate what to do with this new information about rigid women. Again, don’t debate whether the info is valid and reasonable….it’s research, case closed.

How did I choose my subjects? Doesn’t matter, it’s research. Is the sample size of persons I carefully choose to create the results I wanted large enough to draw general conclusions for an entire population? Dumb question…it’s research and Newsweek is publishing it as such. How did I reach my conclusions? Aren’t you getting it…..research!!!!

Now the intelligent people will blindly accept my findings because they fit their beliefs and will proceed to comment on how outrageous it is that we allow rigid women to think for themselves and make their own choices. It doesn’t matter that they are adults making their own choices…me and a few people that think like me know what’s best for them.

The morons (which are obviously rapists and child traffickers ) will waste time trying to lie and need to be stopped with new legislation…..hey, you can’t argue with the facts that I found in my “research”.

gbee

That seems to make it legal for me, a man accept the offer from the seller but NOT PAY Her. Yippeee! Happy Daz are here again!

gargleblaster

Hazys wrote: »

Not to belittle some of the terrible lives lead by some sex workers, but this article reaks of BS to me. There are no facts or figures in the article or do they explain the methods they used to arrive at this conclusion. I'd like to see how they back up the statements i quoted above.

This article reads like the opinion of some radical christian group pushing their agenda rather than an article that is there to find the truth about a situation and then propose a workable solution (which will more than likely will go against their religious beliefs)


EDIT: Sorry i only read the article not your comment. I must ask why post this BS article, if you want an intelligent debate as it will only enforce stereotypes?

Why the hostility? I understand questioning the statements in the article, but I don't understand why you'd attack it so emotionally.

It's not a radical group of any religious nature behind it.

As for statistics, I just did a very small amount of looking (only looked at Germany so far) and the claim seems to be justified based on news accounts about the increase in trafficking over the past five years.

I'm all for intelligent debate. I don't consider this a "BS article" and I wonder why you do.

What stereotypes do you think this article is reinforcing?

parker kent

gargleblaster wrote: »

Why the hostility? I understand questioning the statements in the article, but I don't understand why you'd attack it so emotionally.

It's not a radical group of any religious nature behind it.

As for statistics, I just did a very small amount of looking (only looked at Germany so far) and the claim seems to be justified based on news accounts about the increase in trafficking over the past five years.

I'm all for intelligent debate. I don't consider this a "BS article" and I wonder why you do.

What stereotypes do you think this article is reinforcing?

There have been statistics that have shown trafficking to be wildly exaggerated too. They could have mentioned or debated those statistics.

gargleblaster

parker kent wrote: »

There have been statistics that have shown trafficking to be wildly exaggerated too. They could have mentioned or debated those statistics.

They did. They mentioned that the Village Voice threw in that claim, and that both the mayor and the police chief in Seattle said that based on the situation just in that one city, that they doubted the claim had merit. Not the most scientific of claims or refutations, but this isn't a scientific journal - it's a magazine.

By all means feel free to cite statistics that would indicate that it's not true.

I have to say I'm taken aback by the nature of the responses so far. I wonder if anyone has even read the entire article.

Hazys

gargleblaster wrote: »

Why the hostility? I understand questioning the statements in the article, but I don't understand why you'd attack it so emotionally.

It's not a radical group of any religious nature behind it.

As for statistics, I just did a very small amount of looking (only looked at Germany so far) and the claim seems to be justified based on news accounts about the increase in trafficking over the past five years.

I'm all for intelligent debate. I don't consider this a "BS article" and I wonder why you do.

What stereotypes do you think this article is reinforcing?

Its a BS article to me because its just opinion presented as researched fact. There is no basis for the "findings" in the article. The writer can prove anything they wanted with evidence they provided in that article.

If you are going make a statement like "making prostitution illegal in Sweden has reduced trafficking, while making it legal in Holland has increased trafficking" then i'd like to see some intelligent statistics to back it up.

The stereotypes i'm saying that are being promoted in this article are that every prostitute is forced into it at a young age, is forced into drugs by their pimp so that he can control them.

gargleblaster wrote: »

By all means feel free to cite statistics that would indicate that it's not true.

The onus is on us to provide the statistics to counter the arguments in the article otherwise we'll have to take the article as fact!?!?

TBH, i'm not really debating the actual issues with prostitution. I'm just kinda pissed off that people can publish whatever they want with no proof or reasonable methods of research and then people take what they read as fact.

Like you said its a magazine not a scientific journal. Generally a magazine's goal is to sell as many copies as possible while a scientific journal's goal is to find the truth. Then again scientific research is only as objective as the motives of the people funding it.

gbee

gargleblaster wrote: »

I have to say I'm taken aback by the nature of the responses so far. I wonder if anyone has even read the entire article.

Well, I did not, it just seems to me that I can have free sex with women prostitutes and they cannot force me to pay as that would incriminate me [the man].

In this same situation prior to this, both would be criminals and the pimp would sort it out, the poor pimp is already and endangered species so if I report her pimp hassling me for money, both can now be arrested and I am legally free and have not committed a crime.

gargleblaster

Hazys wrote: »

Its a BS article to me because its just opinion presented as researched fact. There is no basis for the "findings" in the article. The writer can prove anything they wanted with evidence they provided in that article.

I disagree. Just because the findings aren't cited doesn't mean they don't exist. I can understand disagreeing with the claims, but not the idea that because you disagree they must all be made up out of whole cloth. Like I said it's a magazine, not a scientific journal.

If you are going make a statement like "making prostitution illegal in Sweden has reduced trafficking, while making it legal in Holland has increased trafficking" then i'd like to see some intelligent statistics to back it up.

Well like I said, very little digging provided me with some data to back up the claim re: Germany. I could do some more homework but I'm actually not interested in backing up every claim in the article. I thought a wider discussion might result from this piece, as opposed to seizing on one aspect of it.

The stereotypes i'm saying that are being promoted in this article are that every prostitute is forced into it at a young age, is forced into drugs by their pimp so that he can control them.

That claim actually wasn't made. One of the prostitutes in the article is quoted as saying otherwise. Why are you assuming that you know what's in the article, or if you did read it, why are you twisting it to suit your agenda?

The onus is on us to provide the statistics to counter the arguments in the article otherwise we'll have to take the article as fact!?!?

No, you can decide it's all made up and move on if you like. Nobody's forcing you to believe anything. However if you've already decided it's all "BS" then why are you still here?

TBH, i'm not really into debating the actual issues with prostitution. I'm just kinda pissed off that people can publish whatever they want with no proof or reasonable methods of research and then people take what they read as fact.

This isn't a skeptics forum (but here's a discussion of the subject in a skeptics forum: http://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/3579/does-legalizing-prostitution-lead-to-an-increase-in-human-trafficking). And as I said before, just because the data isn't cited in the magazine doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.

Like you said its a magazine not a scientific journal. Generally a magazine's goal is to sell as many copies as possible while a scientific journal's goal is to find the truth. Then again scientific research is only as objective as the motives of the people funding it.

You might be surprised to know that in addition to doing studies like this for groups who are fighting human trafficking - she has also received funding from state governments and the Kaiser Foundation.

Some of her research has been criticized of course, but it isn't logical to dismiss it all with a wave of the hand, assuming that due to the fact that you find the claims in a magazine article suspect, that it somehow logically follows that any research she has done is not credible.

gargleblaster

gbee wrote: »

Well, I did not, it just seems to me that I can have free sex with women prostitutes and they cannot force me to pay as that would incriminate me [the man].

In this same situation prior to this, both would be criminals and the pimp would sort it out, the poor pimp is already and endangered species so if I report her pimp hassling me for money, both can now be arrested and I am legally free and have not committed a crime.

gbee I would suggest that you might want to read about how this new way of dealing with prostitution works as you seem to be confused about it. Here's a link, the pdf available at this page explains it well:
http://si.se/English/Navigation/Current-projects2/Human-trafficking/Human-trafficking/

Alopex

Both buying and selling should be illegal

Many men will take the risk buying a girl. The girls have nothing to lose as they cannot be prosecuted. Therefore there will still be a sex industry, just occasionally a man will be prosecuted.

The girls and pimps will do their best to make it easy for men to avoid prosecution, they don't want their clients going to jail.

There may be fewer recorded incidence of prostitution in sweden, but I'd bet the ones that remain are working under much worse conditions, possibly as sex slaves, rather than the typical prostitute who keeps most of the money

Lavezzi

Alopex wrote: »

Both buying and selling should be illegal

Many men will take the risk buying a girl. The girls have nothing to lose as they cannot be prosecuted. Therefore there will still be a sex industry, just occasionally a man will be prosecuted.

The girls and pimps will do their best to make it easy for men to avoid prosecution, they don't want their clients going to jail.

There may be fewer recorded incidence of prostitution in sweden, but I'd bet the ones that remain are working under much worse conditions, possibly as sex slaves, rather than the typical prostitute who keeps most of the money

There are 1000+ actively working prostitutes in Ireland, who typically get between 4-8 customers daily. So there are are at least 4000 men getting prostitutes a day. Now, keep in mind we are a country with a population of 4 million. So, if there's 2 million men in Ireland, that means 1 in 500 of them are getting prostitutes every day. I doubt any of these men are going more than once a week so that's 1 in 71 men in Ireland buying sex each week. There's no denying escorting is big business here, due to the huge value of sex in Ireland. You think if it is fully removed altogether it won't make a bit of difference? You think there's no chance men that value sex that much and were getting it regularly, but cannot get it anymore, may need to resort to unconsentual ways to find it?

Be careful what you wish for. Making it fully illegal could result in a far larger and worse epidemic than human trafficking. As a female you're unable to relate to these particular needs that men possess. The only options are to regulate it or leave it the way it is. Independent escorting is 100% fine but cannot be taxed. Don't be brainwashed by feminist and religious agenda driven organisations that do not really care about the women they claim to want to protect. They only want to push their own conservative moral views and tell others how to live their lives. And they know anyone who is in opposition can be labelled a woman-abusing sex-addict. In reality, criminalizing prostitution will only drive it further underground and make victims of trafficking more reluctant to come forward. Clearly there is a huge demand for sex here. Without an outlet for this, I strongly believe rape rates will go through the roof, just like they did in Sweden after those bogus laws were introduced.

Morgase

Lavezzi wrote: »

As a female you're unable to relate to these particular needs that men possess.

Ah yes, the old "women don't have a sex drive" chestnut.

For what it's worth, I'm inclined to come down on the regulation side of the fence rather than completely banning the buying and selling of sex - but my reasoning doesn't go along the lines of "we'd better allow it otherwise the poor deprived men will be raping left, right and centre".

gargleblaster

Alopex wrote: »

There may be fewer recorded incidence of prostitution in sweden, but I'd bet the ones that remain are working under much worse conditions, possibly as sex slaves, rather than the typical prostitute who keeps most of the money

That is actually far from typical.

Lavezzi wrote: »

You think there's no chance men that value sex that much and were getting it regularly, but cannot get it anymore, may need to resort to unconsentual ways to find it?

It's not about valuing sex. It's about feeling entitled to it. Many men (and women) aren't able to find partners for sex, not all of them resort to buying it (or raping people, wrt your "unconsentual" comment).

Be careful what you wish for. Making it fully illegal could result in a far larger and worse epidemic than human trafficking. As a female you're unable to relate to these particular needs that men possess.

That's ridiculous. Many men are involved with the movement to change the way humanity views women (i.e. not as ojbects).

The only options are to regulate it or leave it the way it is.

That's clearly untrue.

Independent escorting is 100% fine but cannot be taxed. Don't be brainwashed by feminist and religious agenda driven organisations that do not really care about the women they claim to want to protect. They only want to push their own conservative moral views and tell others how to live their lives. And they know anyone who is in opposition can be labelled a woman-abusing sex-addict. In reality, criminalizing prostitution will only drive it further underground and make victims of trafficking more reluctant to come forward. Clearly there is a huge demand for sex here. Without an outlet for this, I strongly believe rape rates will go through the roof, just like they did in Sweden after those bogus laws were introduced.

That's utterly untrue. Do you have any reason for saying that? Do you find any fault with the social services in Sweden which cater to sex slaves and prostitutes, try to help them overcome addictions, and better their lives?

Also, please cite your claim that the incidence of rape skyrocketed after these laws were implemented, thanks.

parker kent

gargleblaster wrote: »

They did. They mentioned that the Village Voice threw in that claim, and that both the mayor and the police chief in Seattle said that based on the situation just in that one city, that they doubted the claim had merit. Not the most scientific of claims or refutations, but this isn't a scientific journal - it's a magazine.

By all means feel free to cite statistics that would indicate that it's not true.

I have to say I'm taken aback by the nature of the responses so far. I wonder if anyone has even read the entire article.

I'm not referring to the Village Voice, I'm referring to actual research from genuine sources. Actual research exists on both sides of the debate, but my problem with the article is that it is basically an opinion piece. Hence my earlier reply.

You asked why were people responding in a certain manner towards the article so I gave one reason. I'm not really a fan of unfounded opinions in magazines, especially for a topic like this.

Lavezzi

gargleblaster wrote: »

That is actually far from typical.

Please cite your claim that is is far from typical for an independent escort to keep all the money she earns when freely and legally travelling to a country to sell sex, thanks.

gargleblaster wrote: »

It's not about valuing sex. It's about feeling entitled to it. Many men (and women) aren't able to find partners for sex, not all of them resort to buying it (or raping people, wrt your "unconsentual" comment).

Yes, some men do feel entitled to it. That was my point. Maybe it's the men who don't feel as entitled to it that are the ones who don't resort to buying it. Take away an outlet for those that do, that is when we could start seeing the "raping people" aspect of what I was saying.

gargleblaster wrote: »

That's ridiculous. Many men are involved with the movement to change the way humanity views women (i.e. not as ojbects).

OK, I change that to: "As a female you're unable to relate to these particular entitlements that some men possess."

gargleblaster wrote: »

That's utterly untrue. Do you have any reason for saying that? Do you find any fault with the social services in Sweden which cater to sex slaves and prostitutes, try to help them overcome addictions, and better their lives?

Also, please cite your claim that the incidence of rape skyrocketed after these laws were implemented, thanks.

I was just making lazy unfounded assumptions as others in this discussion have one, but going the other way.

Alopex

Lavezzi wrote: »

There are 1000+ actively working prostitutes in Ireland, who typically get between 4-8 customers daily. So there are are at least 4000 men getting prostitutes a day. Now, keep in mind we are a country with a population of 4 million. So, if there's 2 million men in Ireland, that means 1 in 500 of them are getting prostitutes every day. I doubt any of these men are going more than once a week so that's 1 in 71 men in Ireland buying sex each week. There's no denying escorting is big business here, due to the huge value of sex in Ireland. You think if it is fully removed altogether it won't make a bit of difference? You think there's no chance men that value sex that much and were getting it regularly, but cannot get it anymore, may need to resort to unconsentual ways to find it?

Be careful what you wish for. Making it fully illegal could result in a far larger and worse epidemic than human trafficking. As a female you're unable to relate to these particular needs that men possess. The only options are to regulate it or leave it the way it is. Independent escorting is 100% fine but cannot be taxed. Don't be brainwashed by feminist and religious agenda driven organisations that do not really care about the women they claim to want to protect. They only want to push their own conservative moral views and tell others how to live their lives. And they know anyone who is in opposition can be labelled a woman-abusing sex-addict. In reality, criminalizing prostitution will only drive it further underground and make victims of trafficking more reluctant to come forward. Clearly there is a huge demand for sex here. Without an outlet for this, I strongly believe rape rates will go through the roof, just like they did in Sweden after those bogus laws were introduced.

that post was meant in the context of criminalising the customer but not the prostitute. That is what I think is stupid.

I'd have no problem with a fully legal nationalised service.

goose2005

Also, even if trafficking does occur, that's a reason to prosecute slavers, not to ban prostitution. People are often found performing domestic or farm work for little or no pay; few then demand that domestic servants or agriculture should be banned.

Ickle Magoo

Lavezzi wrote: »

OK, I change that to: "As a female you're unable to relate to these particular entitlements that some men possess."

Lavezzi wrote: »

I was just making lazy unfounded assumptions as others in this discussion have one, but going the other way.

8 posts, all in this forum - multiple warnings/thread locks and having already received one ban for ignoring both the forum charter and ethos, you are clearly out to collect more.

Permabanned.

goose2005

gargleblaster wrote: »

That is actually far from typical.

tbh from what I've read on the matter it is typical for a prostitute to keep the vast majority (if not all) of the money she gets. And even if she doesn't, aren't their lots of jobs where the people at the top make all the money and those at the bottom do the dirty work?

gargleblaster

goose2005 wrote: »

tbh from what I've read on the matter it is typical for a prostitute to keep the vast majority (if not all) of the money she gets. And even if she doesn't, aren't their lots of jobs where the people at the top make all the money and those at the bottom do the dirty work?

It is true that women who work in it where it's legal get to keep most of the money they earn.

The problem is that even where it's legal, there is underground (illegal) prostitution. Not all Johns want to wear rubbers, nor do they want to refrain from doing whatever they want with the person they use, and not all of them want to use adults. Also, where society conveys the idea that the ability to buy sex is a perfectly normal and accpetable thing, demand increases. Those women (and children) who are coerced into the illegal side of the industry most certainly do not get to keep most of their money.

This is why I think the Swedish model is a good one. It has reduced demand for prostitutes overall, thereby reducing sex trafficking. It obviously isn't a perfect solution, but I think the fact that Sweden's neighbors have started adopting the policy and other countries are seriously considering it speaks volumes.

IvyTheTerrible

I have a problem with the author calling this "research" when it is not published in a peer-reviewed journal. As a scientist, I cannot publicise my work without that work being reviewed by other specialists in the same field and so the same should apply to this person. Otherwise it's just opinion.

gargleblaster

I could be mistaken, but it seems the paper was submitted earlier this month to the organization that publishes the American Journal of Community Psychology. It's not the New England Journal of Medicine but I'm sure it also takes some time between submission and possible publication.

Is there any problem with the actual methodology?

Obviously those claiming that human trafficking isn't a significant problem do question the methodology used to back up the claims that it is, but that's not news. I side with the UN on that score, though. Some issues (such as these) aren't so easy to quantify, so it does leave lots of room for debate.

Also found this article which references this same study:
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2011/07/20/us/life-us-usa-prostitution.html?_r=3&hp