So is prostitution to be outlawed in Ireland or what?

FleekAF

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Is Prostitution like other jobs though?
While I understand the harmful effect that criminalization has, is this type of sex work something that is impact free even in a well managed system.

Letting somebody use your body for money isn't the same as working in ALDI, I would be curious about what the long term psychological effects are RE depression, ability to form "normal" relationships, drug use etc (due to the job itself not the criminality aspect), remember people can be pretty messed up and/or abused in subtle ways.

We don't tend to legalize (its different if something is already legal due to social intertia) other types of activity that can be harmful.

And is there an argument that legalization increases prostitution?I would hazard it does, in places in mainland Europe prostitution appears to be more common and without the same social stigma for users of prostitutes which likely increases use.

The psychological effects are the same as any high pressure job.
Drug use is no more prevalent amongst SW than the general populace. Drug using SW tend to have been drug users prior to entering sex work and it is them most at risk under the new law.

Serious Drug use is an issue for a large number of street sex workers but note the industry has mostly moved indoors. Indoor sex workers with substance dependency issues generally have better access to the right help as many of them unlike street workers hail from modestly comfortable socio-economic backgrounds to begin with.

Depression/Anxiety and the ability to form meaningful safe relationships are all things that have their beginnings in adolescence as this is the time most people solidify their coping mechanisms (which is why those who do suffer from the above tend to first find out about it in Secondary school or upon leaving home for College)

Legalization is unlikely to increase or decrease the number of people willing to avail of Sexual services, only those who do actually get to.
With a legal framework in place safeguarding the rights of those in sex work prosecuting those who would otherwise harm,intimidate or blackmail escorts would be a straightforward affair ; which would in turn (hopefully) deter violent criminals, bad landlords, and rapists.

nokia69

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I already answered your question nokia and I gave you a definition of consent, but I'll go with this one then if it will finally get you to stop bitching -

no thats the first clear answer you have given to the question, as it happens I have no problem with that definition

also you got the definition from the Irish times link, I'm not sure if thats what you believe yourself

because just that last night you were claiming that consent was impossible once money had changed hands, which is of course total BS

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Canterelle

FleekAF wrote: »

The psychological effects are the same as any high pressure job.


Really? So a brain surgeon/stock broker/ lawyer suffers the same psychological side effects as a sex worker? Where did you get this?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

One eyed Jack

FleekAF wrote: »

The psychological effects are the same as any high pressure job.
Drug use is no more prevalent amongst SW than the general populace. Drug using SW tend to have been drug users prior to entering sex work and it is them most at risk under the new law.

Serious Drug use is an issue for a large number of street sex workers but note the industry has mostly moved indoors. Indoor sex workers with substance dependency issues generally have better access to the right help as many of them unlike street workers hail from modestly comfortable socio-economic backgrounds to begin with.

Depression/Anxiety and the ability to form meaningful safe relationships are all things that have their beginnings in adolescence as this is the time most people solidify their coping mechanisms (which is why those who do suffer from the above tend to first find out about it in Secondary school or upon leaving home for College)

Legalization is unlikely to increase or decrease the number of people willing to avail of Sexual services, only those who do actually get to.
With a legal framework in place safeguarding the rights of those in sex work prosecuting those who would otherwise harm,intimidate or blackmail escorts would be a straightforward affair; which would in turn (hopefully) deter violent criminals, bad landlords, and rapists.

I was agreeing with much of what you said there up until this point. There is no legal framework conceivable, even one safeguarding the rights of those people engaged in sex work, that would make prosecuting those who would otherwise harm, intimidate, or blackmail escorts and sex workers, straightforward. You've said as much yourself that current proposals are unlikely to have any impact on the number of people willing to avail of sexual services, so why would you think any sort of proposals to protect the rights of people who engage in sex work, would be any more likely to deter violent criminals, bad landlords and rapists?

Violent criminals, bad landlords and rapists will continue to be violent criminals, bad landlords and rapists in spite of any legal framework you could conceive, simply because they will just ignore the law because they don't plan on getting caught, and even then, the penalties are unlikely to be severe enough to deter other violent criminals, bad landlords and rapists from doing the same thing, because they don't plan on getting caught either, and if they are caught, the penalty is unlikely to be severe enough to deter them again either.

Look at how the smoking ban has been implemented in Irish society - people still want to smoke, but now they cannot smoke where they want because the proprietor would face a €3,000 penalty. If I want to smoke it's my business. If I want to smoke in public, then it becomes society's business. If people want to avail of sexual services, that's their business. If they want to do so in public, in establishments where such activities are illegal, then that's society's business.

nokia69

One eyed Jack wrote: »

If people want to avail of sexual services, that's their business. If they want to do so in public, in establishments where such activities are illegal, then that's society's business.

what the hell does this mean, who wants to have sex in public

who adults have sex with is no one's business but their own

Connacht15

Most people would support the general thrust of this bill! However trying to stop consenting adults having sex with each other is a serious No No!
There is absolutely no EU Directive to bring in the Swedish Model and Germany and Britain certainly will not do so in the lifetimes of their present administrations!
The last EU parliament voted in a non binding manner to support the nutter Swedish Model which has made life hell on earth for sex workers! BTW all of The ROI Meps in that parliament including Paul Murphy so called Socialist supported that madness!
It has been a criminal offence since June 1 in Northern Ireland to 'purchase' sex and guess what? There has been 0 prosecutions! More escorts than ever are working there according to that famous site!
Laura Lee a Dublin born highly educated sex worker is taking a case against The Northern Law and will take The ROI to The Supreme Court and Europe if necessary and will win!
Canada under Fundamentalist Christian Stephen Harper brought in anti sex worker/anti sex work laws contrary to it Supreme Court mandate to do the exact opposite! Justin Trudeau's new Liberal Government have vowed to get rid of them!

Connacht15

If you value the right of consenting adults to have sex with each other in private eplease support Laura's fundraising just GOOGLE her name and you will be directed to her site!
I cannot post links as a newbie!

222233

I really don't see why this is of importance. I don't get the purpose of criminalisation/decriminalisation - I don't see an issue at the moment. These men and women are happy to be SW and their clients are happy to avail of their services - win win ?

Having said that maybe they should pay a few quid in tax like everyone else.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Connacht15

Also the 2 main groups behind this are -

1 Ruhama an organisation formed by the same orders of nuns who nran the Magdellyne death camps, where vicims of rape and incest were incarcerated for the rest of their lives as slave labour and had their new born babies trafficked to rich Irish American families! It is also an organiszation which has been given money in fines confiscated from convicted sex workers before the courts - what do we call people who benefit from the earnings of sex workers? BTW this money might have been life savings and not from sex work at all!

2 The Immigrant Council of Ireland under Denise Charlton, It's said she wants to be the first lesbian president of Ireland, let me guarantee you the misery this insane law will cause as it has done in Sweden and Norway, will mean her ambition will never be realised! The ICI is also nowhere to be seen when Eastern European sex workers who are here voluntarily end up before the courts!

Connacht15

222233 wrote: »

I really don't see why this is of importance. I don't get the purpose of criminalisation/decriminalisation - I don't see an issue at the moment. These men and women are happy to be SW and their clients are happy to avail of their services - win win ?

Having said that maybe they should pay a few quid in tax like everyone else.

It's about crucifying sex workers who are the main group who will suffer under this madness and spanking working class clients, the great and the goods and our wonderful police punters will never ever be prosecuted under it! At least in Sweden it is enforced without class bias!

Connacht15

The burden of proof in Irish law is higher than Swdedish law whwere most ensnared punters just take a slap on the wrist fine!
However i think a court appearance for a caught punter will be mandatory under Fitzgerald's madness!

FleekAF

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I was agreeing with much of what you said there up until this point. There is no legal framework conceivable, even one safeguarding the rights of those people engaged in sex work, that would make prosecuting those who would otherwise harm, intimidate, or blackmail escorts and sex workers, straightforward. You've said as much yourself that current proposals are unlikely to have any impact on the number of people willing to avail of sexual services, so why would you think any sort of proposals to protect the rights of people who engage in sex work, would be any more likely to deter violent criminals, bad landlords and rapists?

Violent criminals, bad landlords and rapists will continue to be violent criminals, bad landlords and rapists in spite of any legal framework you could conceive, simply because they will just ignore the law because they don't plan on getting caught, and even then, the penalties are unlikely to be severe enough to deter other violent criminals, bad landlords and rapists from doing the same thing, because they don't plan on getting caught either, and if they are caught, the penalty is unlikely to be severe enough to deter them again either.
.

True, but that there would be a penalty would go some way to cutting down on such incidents. Having one more charge taken against them could see them put away for a much longer time and more closely scrutinized upon their release.

Canterelle wrote: »

FleekAF wrote: »

The psychological effects are the same as any high pressure job.


Really? So a brain surgeon/stock broker/ lawyer suffers the same psychological side effects as a sex worker? Where did you get this?

I would say more Social worker/Care-taker/Nurse/Salesperson.
It also depends on whether or not that particular Brain surgeon/stock brocker/lawyer (and sex worker) has underlying mental health issues.

Why not go googling? Keeping in mind SW are people too with many of the same pressures in life as others such as Bills,Family, Mortgages etc.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

nokia69

Connacht15 wrote: »

Also the 2 main groups behind this are -

1 Ruhama an organisation formed by the same orders of nuns who nran the Magdellyne death camps, where vicims of rape and incest were incarcerated for the rest of their lives as slave labour and had their new born babies trafficked to rich Irish American families! It is also an organiszation which has been given money in fines confiscated from convicted sex workers before the courts - what do we call people who benefit from the earnings of sex workers? BTW this money might have been life savings and not from sex work at all!

it really is amazing that the government would let these nuns be involved in shaping our laws

only in Ireland

Connacht15

From what I gather there are no additonal decriminalization possibilities being explored for sex workers, sex workers working in private on their own are fully legal! If however 2 or more work from the same location (even on different days) it is a brothel and both can be prosecuted - more insanity!

Connacht15

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

So an on the spot fine aá the new cycling fines is it?
I suspect it will be enforced as the minister is so gung ho for it unlike in Northern ireland where Justice Minister David Forde and his Alliance Party were strongly against it!
BTW The Shinners and The Socialist Party support the madness!
PBP, Mick Wallace and Calire Daly and Senator Norris do not!

paleoperson

nokia69 wrote: »

it really is amazing that the government would let these nuns be involved in shaping our laws

only in Ireland

Capitalize your sentences.

nokia69

paleoperson wrote: »

Capitalize your sentences.

no

Connacht15

The JOC on prostitution law reform including such brain boxes as Bachick, Mullen, Fergal McGrath and Stanton recommended unanimously that anybody, - curious teenager, sex worker looking for warnings on dangerous punters or safe sex advise or potential punter - accessing any escort related website such as Ei, be treated as the legal equivalent of a paedophile downloading child pornography!
HOW COMPLETELY INSANE IS THAT? And some reflection on our so called public representatives!
This recommendation seems to have bit the dust thankfully but they haven't gone away you know!

Avatar MIA

paleoperson wrote: »

Capitalize your sentences.

And you can leave out your Americanisms.

Connacht15

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I was agreeing with much of what you said there up until this point. There is no legal framework conceivable, even one safeguarding the rights of those people engaged in sex work, that would make prosecuting those who would otherwise harm, intimidate, or blackmail escorts and sex workers, straightforward. You've said as much yourself that current proposals are unlikely to have any impact on the number of people willing to avail of sexual services, so why would you think any sort of proposals to protect the rights of people who engage in sex work, would be any more likely to deter violent criminals, bad landlords and rapists?

Violent criminals, bad landlords and rapists will continue to be violent criminals, bad landlords and rapists in spite of any legal framework you could conceive, simply because they will just ignore the law because they don't plan on getting caught, and even then, the penalties are unlikely to be severe enough to deter other violent criminals, bad landlords and rapists from doing the same thing, because they don't plan on getting caught either, and if they are caught, the penalty is unlikely to be severe enough to deter them again either.

Look at how the smoking ban has been implemented in Irish society - people still want to smoke, but now they cannot smoke where they want because the proprietor would face a €3,000 penalty. If I want to smoke it's my business. If I want to smoke in public, then it becomes society's business. If people want to avail of sexual services, that's their business. If they want to do so in public, in establishments where such activities are illegal, then that's society's business.

Driving the sex trade underground will be a boon to traffickers psychotic cloients and nasty pimps! SEx workers will foe example be forced to engage in riskier sexual practices with clients by pimps as the amount of ODP (ordinary decent punters) will have declined!
But that whatit's about making sex workers suffer, it will also lead to a mass leaving of the consensual foreign service providers here at the moment!

FleekAF

222233 wrote: »

I really don't see why this is of importance. I don't get the purpose of criminalisation/decriminalisation - I don't see an issue at the moment. These men and women are happy to be SW and their clients are happy to avail of their services - win win ?

Having said that maybe they should pay a few quid in tax like everyone else.

It's important because Sex Workers rights are Womens' rights and the state already does badly at taking care of those as is.

It's important because this goodwill generating ploy will be paid for by the Tax-payer with most of the proceeds going to a corrupt and ineffficient NGO.

Not to mention the Immigration council of Ireland are using this as an excuse to ignore their real job. Immigrants languishing away in Hostels, forced to rely on government aid due to the astonishingly slow process of their paperwork,lax screening of those coming from "war-torn" countries, and a lack of help in getting Immigrants from outside the Western world Irish recognized certification.

Unable to work legally many immigrants may feel the need to quietly engage in employment at a lower rate than is law. They will also be less likely to report unsafe practices in their workplaces or any abuses done on to them by their employers.

Driving Sex Work underground would lead to an increase in STD's for reasons I can't yet link to but have already been mentioned.(Some random group named the WHO said this apparently)

One eyed Jack

FleekAF wrote: »

It's important because Sex Workers rights are Womens' rights and the state already does badly at taking care of those as is.

It's important because this goodwill generating ploy will be paid for by the Tax-payer with most of the proceeds going to a corrupt and ineffficient NGO.

Not to mention the Immigration council of Ireland are using this as an excuse to ignore their real job. Immigrants languishing away in Hostels, forced to rely on government aid due to the astonishingly slow process of their paperwork,lax screening of those coming from "war-torn" countries, and a lack of help in getting Immigrants from outside the Western world Irish recognized certification.

Unable to work legally many immigrants may feel the need to quietly engage in employment at a lower rate than is law. They will also be less likely to report unsafe practices in their workplaces or any abuses done on to them by their employers.

Driving Sex Work underground would lead to an increase in STD's for reasons I can't yet link to but have already been mentioned.(Some random group named the WHO said this apparently)

Fleek you make some good points, and I agree with you about the likes of the way Ruhama and the Immigration Council of Ireland operate (said as much earlier in the thread myself), even if I find you're being a tad hyperbolic tbh.

But the bit I've highlighted in bold there - "sex workers rights are women's rights", what? Sex workers rights are sex workers rights, and that includes both women, and men, in the industry, not just women. Many of the sex worker organisations though are just as good at remembering that male sex workers exist as Ruhama and the Immigration Council of Ireland, that is to say - not very bloody good at remembering that fact at all, let alone so much as acknowledging their existence or indeed paying any attention to their welfare beyond a mere token effort as long as they might fit that organisations' profile and get with their program.

Do you think the State takes any better care of men or something? There are many men, and many male sex workers, who would say the very same thing about themselves, as you have said about women.

It doesn't take a genius to figure out either that if prostitution is driven underground (was it ever really overground?), that many people working as sex workers will take more risks than they do already and will likely forego using protection in order to be able to continue to work and earn money. That happens already, just not to the same degree among the more affluent and well educated people who choose to engage in sex work and see it as legitimate employment. They're not desperate, whereas someone who is engaged in sex work to survive? There's nothing they won't do for money, and your so-called 'punters', 'clients', call them whatever the hell you like to make them sound respectable, they know this, and they exploit it.

You don't get to blame the State for that, you don't get to blame Ruhama for that, you don't get to blame the Immigration Council of Ireland for that. You don't even get to blame people who are sex workers for that. Put the blame squarely where it belongs - on the people who would seek to exploit other people's misery and destitution. Those people aren't 'punters', they aren't 'clients', they're scumbags, and it's they who should be treated as such by society, not the people whom they exploit, while those scumbags are seen as respectable, upstanding members of the community... :rolleyes:

Really boils my piss sometimes the way in these threads single digit posters advocating for sex work to be made legal, and bitching about "poor working class punters being criminalised", they really couldn't give a fcuk about them, at least be honest and say that it's about money rather than trying to portray yourselves as the tarts with hearts. It's a joke, and anyone who has worked in the industry for any length of time will smell bulls.hit insincere patter like that a mile off.

paleoperson

In my opinion not capitalizing sentences is unacceptable, abnormally seeking attention, really annoying and it's a real pity if that's the reason I'm going to have to stop posting here.

FleekAF

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Fleek you make some good points, and I agree with you about the likes of the way Ruhama and the Immigration Council of Ireland operate (said as much earlier in the thread myself), even if I find you're being a tad hyperbolic tbh..

Volunteered in a hostel out in the West of Ireland.Was not impressed.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

But the bit I've highlighted in bold there - "sex workers rights are women's rights", what? Sex workers rights are sex workers rights, and that includes both women, and men, in the industry, not just women. Many of the sex worker organisations though are just as good at remembering that male sex workers exist as Ruhama and the Immigration Council of Ireland, that is to say - not very bloody good at remembering that fact at all, let alone so much as acknowledging their existence or indeed paying any attention to their welfare beyond a mere token effort as long as they might fit that organisations' profile and get with their program.

Do you think the State takes any better care of men or something? There are many men, and many male sex workers, who would say the very same thing about themselves, as you have said about women.

Yes and no. Men generally don't fall pregnant. Men generally aren't the ones expected to do the bulk of child-rearing. Men generally aren't the ones being told what they can and can't do with their bodies. That male sex workers are hardly mentioned in this crusade against prostitution just proves that it's a woman's issue. Yet again we're being told by people supposedly for us that we're too meek mannered and feeble minded to make our own decisions, that we are always the victim in sex (not rape), that men exist only to abuse us- essentially they're attempting to control us Women.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

It doesn't take a genius to figure out either that if prostitution is driven underground (was it ever really overground?), that many people working as sex workers will take more risks than they do already and will likely forego using protection in order to be able to continue to work and earn money. That happens already, just not to the same degree among the more affluent and well educated people who choose to engage in sex work and see it as legitimate employment. They're not desperate, whereas someone who is engaged in sex work to survive? There's nothing they won't do for money, and your so-called 'punters', 'clients', call them whatever the hell you like to make them sound respectable, they know this, and they exploit it.

Probably. Desperate is as Desperate does.Yet let's keep in mind a Sex Workers health quite literally is their wealth - with legalisation would come regular mandatory testing.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

You don't get to blame the State for that, you don't get to blame Ruhama for that, you don't get to blame the Immigration Council of Ireland for that. You don't even get to blame people who are sex workers for that. Put the blame squarely where it belongs - on the people who would seek to exploit other people's misery and destitution. Those people aren't 'punters', they aren't 'clients', they're scumbags, and it's they who should be treated as such by society, not the people whom they exploit, while those scumbags are seen as respectable, upstanding members of the community... :rolleyes:/QUOTE]

I don't believe I was blaming anyone for risky behaviors engaged in by some, rather I pointed out this crusade would encourage risky behavior and see it unpunished. What makes you think punters/clients/etc seek to exploit other peoples misery and destitution? Following that argument I should be blaming Ruhama and the Immigration council.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Really boils my piss sometimes the way in these threads single digit posters advocating for sex work to be made legal, and bitching about "poor working class punters being criminalised", they really couldn't give a fcuk about them, at least be honest and say that it's about money rather than trying to portray yourselves as the tarts with hearts. It's a joke, and anyone who has worked in the industry for any length of time will smell bulls.hit insincere patter like that a mile off.

It's a hot button issue and there's not many places you can discuss this, hardly unusal for a person to sign up to a forum to comment on the few threads they care to follow. "Poor working class punters"? Could you link or quote who said that exactly? Also, having worked in the industry do you care to share your personal experience with the rest of us so we may better understand where you're coming from? How is it insincere for Service providers to care for the well being of those who avail of their services? What makes you assume every woman for the legalization of sex work is a sex worker themselves?

Have you considered changing your name to Jumping Jack :P? I kid but seriously,

Mister Vain

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Put the blame squarely where it belongs - on the people who would seek to exploit other people's misery and destitution. Those people aren't 'punters', they aren't 'clients', they're scumbags, and it's they who should be treated as such by society, not the people whom they exploit, while those scumbags are seen as respectable, upstanding members of the community... :rolleyes:

You're really projecting now at this point. Not everyone who avails of the services of a sex worker is a scumbag. Have you done any research on the people that use sex workers? They come from all walks of life, and there's no exploitation when there's two consenting adults involved.

The real scumbags are the people who are responsible for the trafficking, but the sex workers in this country that are trafficked are in the minority. This is obviously an intensely personal subject for you and you're only really looking at one side of the story. It's all too easy to label sex workers and their clients as X,Y,Z, but its a lot more complex than that.