Prostitution

Dinxminx wrote: »

Okay perhaps that was a very strong statement. What I meant to say was that the prostitutes I see picking up clients in town in groups are always with a pimp or two in the background keeping an eye on them, are foreign, and look malnourished, drugged up to their eyeballs, and sad.

That has nothing to do with trafficking, and is just your subjective opinion.

T runner wrote: »

The report referenced in my last post clearly indicates the scale of trafficking in Ireland and the nature of prostitution.

I work for a public sector agency who amongst other things deals with the author of that report (Ruhama) and honestly I would not trust a single word they say. On a very basic level they believe all prostitutes are sex slaves and all migrant prostitutes are trafficked sex slaves. What makes things worse is the majority of Ruhama's funding comes from the tax payer (via the HSE). T Runner my advice to you is to research where you are getting your information from because Ruhama are part of an extremist Christian coalition who use disinformation about prostitution and lap dancers to further their agenda. If you don't believe me I urge you to volunteer with their organisation and you will see 1) they are a bunch of religious extremists (priests and nuns) and 2) they have no relationship with any of the other anti-prostitution organisations in Ireland due to their lack of credibility. A few years ago they sponsored Catharine MacKinnon to come to Ireland. Says it all really!

Deleted User wrote: »

Nobody here is trying to say that trafficking does not exist in Ireland. Just as we're not saying that trafficking can not be tied to some prostitution in Ireland.

The report demonstrates that trafficking is widespread in Irish prostitution and that you have no way of knowing if a prostitute is trafficked or not. Some of Carroll's prostitutes (many used in mainstraem brothels) were trafficked. Even he did not know which ones.

Rather we're suggesting that its not as widespread as you or Ruhama would like to suggest...

A deliberate strawman. The report was by The Irish Immigrant Council (The HSE gave some input). The report was not by me or Ruhama.

Earlier on you claimed there was no substantiation for a high level of Trafficking and coercion in Irish prostitution. Now you ignore the evidence and try to discredit a source which did not even produce the report. You are clutching at straws.

If you claim that trafficking or coercion is not widespread please counter my evidence.

Its a demonstration of how some women are trafficked and forced into prostitution in Irish brothels, not that all prostitutes or even the majority of prostitutes in Ireland are coerced.

The majority of Carrolls prostitutes were coerced according to the Welsh judge who knows a damn site more than you.

I will re-iterate my stance on this. A continued ban on prostitution just encourages such a trade to grow in Ireland, and does nothing to remove the chance of it occurring.

The statistics from Sweden (provided earlier) indicate that this is not the case and attacking the demand by criminalising the misfits who hire prostitutes is the best way forward. The fact that they might be having sex with a slave or someone who is coerced does not bother them When faced with a fine or worse these guys quickly go back to using their hand.

A system where prostitutes were able to operate freely, with protection through the law, and licenses to operate would drastically reduce the profit that sex-traffickers receive from their "businesses".

International examples like Holland dont bear this out. Please feel free to substantiate your point with proof. None of the "I know someone in the industry who says.." hot air please.

The blanket ban on prostitution is not working. Has never worked. And will not do anything except either maintain the current situation, or worse encourage more sex-trafficking in the future. The newspaper reports do a rather good job of promoting the possible profits for people with flexible or no moral centers.

The ban shouldnt be on prostitution it should be on people paying for sex. They along with brothel owners, pimps and traffickers are the ones with no moral centre.

Which you do not know, since you haven't bothered to ask them, or even attempted to get to know them. And to be rather blunt for the majority of prostitutes its a job that pays rather well. If they don't want to work there, there are still many low paying jobs in this country...

I have evidence in the form of the Immigrant council of Irelands report which says that 89% of the prostitutes they interviewed DO NOT WANT TO BE THERE.

A prostitute will tell you she likes it and wants to be there because that is WHAT YOU ARE PAYING HER TO SAY. One of the biggest complaints from clients on escort sites is that "she didnt put her heart into it". The client does not want to be shown the truth: that the engagement is not pleasurable to the prostitute, that the client means less than nothing to her. If the prostitutes boss learns of this the retribution can often be violent.

The report also states that some clients like to get to know their girls (possibly as an emotional substitute for a girlfriend). You seem to be this type. The girl will not let you know that you mean less than nothing to her because she knows that you are paying her to act as if the engagement is meaningful.

Get a life.

How many people do you know that don't like the jobs they're currently working in? (IT, Education, Banks, etc) I know quite a few. They do it, because they earn the money that guarantees them the standard of living they desire

If you bothered to read the report you will see how difficult it is for prostitutes to leave the profession. Prostitutes work a few weeks in advance so if they decide to leave without telling their boss they will be out a few weeks pay. If they decide to leave and tell the boss losing 3 weeks pay could be the least of her worries.

If you really "knew" prostitutes like you claim surely you would know this.

T runner wrote: »

The author of that comprehensive report was the Irish immigrant council not Ruhama.

No it isn't. Open the report and take a look at who wrote it. It is written by Ruhama and published by the Irish immigrant council.

You are only seeing what you want to see.

mkahnisbent wrote: »

No it isn't. Open the report and take a look at who wrote it. It is written by Ruhama and published by the Irish immigrant council.

You are only seeing what you want to see.

Please show us where in the report you "saw" that.

These are the authors of the report:

About the Authors
Patricia Kelleher has a PhD in Sociology from University College Dublin and was
a Research Fellow at the Centre of European Studies, Harvard University. She is
currently an Adjunct Senior Lecturer in the Department of Sociology at the
University of Limerick. With Carmel Kelleher, in 1987 she established research
consultancy firm kelleherassociates. Her interests include: class, social exclusion
and poverty; masculinities; violence against women; and community planning,
policy formulation and strategic planning.

Monica O’Connor has more than 20 years experience working in the area of
violence against women. She worked in a crisis refuge for abused women and
children for seven years. She then became a social policy analyst and trainer in
Women’s Aid. She was a member of the Task Force on Violence against Women,
which was established by the Irish Government and reported in 1997. In 1997 she
was appointed as the Irish expert to the European Women’s Lobby Observatory
on Violence against Women. She is currently an independent consultant in the
areas of research, policy development and training. She has published
extensively in the area of violence against women. Her recent work addresses
issues relating to the trafficking of women migrants.

Carmel Kelleher has an M. Soc Sc from University College Dublin. Prior to coestablishing
kelleherassociates in 1987 with Patricia Kelleher, she worked in the
Agricultural Research Institute as a Senior Research Officer. Over a 20-year period,
she published significant articles on rural development and underdevelopment,
and on the marginalisation of small family farms. Her current research interests
include: class and inequality, philosophy of science, social change, violence
against women and disadvantaged youth.

Jane Pillinger has a PhD in European Social Policy from the Department of Social
Policy and Sociology, University of Leeds. She is an independent social policy
analyst and a Fellow with the Centre for Care Values (CAVA) Research Centre,
Department of Social Policy and Sociology, University of Leeds. She is researcher
and policy adviser to: the Council of Europe; the International Labour
Organization; the International Organization for Migration; Public Services
International; the European Commission; the European Parliament; the Economic
and Social Committee; the European Trade Union Confederation; various national,
European and international trade union organisations; and the social partners
and government departments in a variety of developed and developing countries
(the Philippines, Kenya, Taiwan, South Africa, Namibia, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia,
Poland, Cyprus, Romania and Moldova).

The Immigrant Council of Ireland have clearly collaborated with Women’s Health Project, Health Service Executive (HSE) and Ruhama (among others) in creating this report:

This research would not have been possible without the collaboration of the Women’s Health Project, Health Service Executive (HSE) and Ruhama. They shared their expertise with us and helped the researchers include the experiences of as many women as possible. We thank them for their cooperation and openness
during the process.

This post has been deleted.

mkahnisbent wrote: »

This is getting tiring.

You refuse to use context.

I'll make this simple for you.

The report was commissioned by the Religious Sisters of Charity.

It's facts came from Ruhama who believe all prostitution is forced prostitution, and therefore all foreign prostitutes are being exploited. Which means all foreign prostitutes have been trafficked. This fits in nicely with the above definition of trafficking.

The Immigrant Council of Ireland openly admit they get their facts from Ruhama.

Both Ruhama and the Immigrant Council of Ireland are run by catholic nuns.

The co-authors of the report:

Monica O’Connor believes all prostitution is violence against women, and men who have sex with prostitutes are commiting sexual assault. (http://ewl.horus.be/SiteResources/data/MediaArchive/Violence%20Centre/News/handbook.pdf)

Jane Pillinger runs "The European Forum of Left Feminists" which is a a very left wing (Marxist) extremist feminist organisation.

Patricia Kelleher & Carmel Kelleher believe prostitution and pornography are violence against women (http://www.justice.ie/en/JELR/Aspirations+of+Women.pdf/Files/Aspirations+of+Women.pdf)

Yep, you're quoting from a document which was written by extremists for a bunch of nuns.

You are like someone getting their information about Islam from Osama Bin Laden.

You are not being balanced.

You don't want to accept reality.

Good luck to you.

Predictably, absolutely no attempt to refute any of the findings of this excellent report.
You cant so you dont. You are reduced to pretending the report was written by someone who didnt write it and attacking the people (who didnt write it).

If the authors of this report actually believed that all migrants were trafficked women why do they claim that there are 102 verified trafficked women?

As up to 97% of prostitutes are migrants then surely the figure would be around or above the 900 mark as there are 1000 prostitutes working in Ireland.

The figure 102 represents the amount that have been rescued or escaped from their situation. Many of these have been rescued by Gardai (Are the Garda Siochana leftist extremists?). Many of these people have been verified as on international lists of trafficked women.
Much of the informatyion in the report has come from the HSE (Are the HSE extremists?) who have dealt directly with prostitutes in Ireland.

Your self styled definition of trafficking which you have attributed to others has proved to be a strawman.

Any chance you can argue the points raised by this report?

mkahnisbent wrote: »

You're still not getting it.

The people who wrote that report think all prostitution is exploitation and violence against women, and that all immigrant workers are trafficked.

I accept they have toned down their beliefs for the report (obviously it would be dismissed out of hand if they didn't), but based on their extremist opinions and incredible bias, the only rational thing to do is to dismiss the report.

I work for the HSE so I can tell you no one here thinks there is much if any evidence for genuine trafficking in Ireland, and the Gardai have also stated there isn't a significant problem.

Like other people who have posted here, I accept any underground industry is going to have problems, but I see no point in being hysterical about a near non-existant problem.

Do you have a problem with prostitution in general, or do you just have a problem with the idea that some women may be (genuinely) forced against their will to work as a prostitute?

Do you think prostitution should be fully decriminalised?

If you could please answer these two questions it would help me put your opinions in context.

Again completely unsubstantiated generalisations.
Yet again it must be said you WILL NOT substantiate any of your far out attacks on the authors of this report because you CANNOT.

Your only substantiation is that you claim to work for the HSE.
If the HSE dont believe in this report then why have they contributed to it?.

Have you any evidence that the HSE formally have rejected this report in view of the fact that they have actually contributed towards it?

If you had read through the thread you would see that I would be in favour of the Swedish model. It seems to have worked better than the legal alternatives in Holland for example.

I believe the client who pays for sex is wrong and is the one creating the demand for the industry and the resultant exploitation. Criminalising paying for sex will reduce the demand. Tis should be done in conjuction with a programme of rehabilitation for prostitutes helping them get out of prostitution.

If you dont mind, please dont ask me any more questions without reading the thread to see if I have answered them already.

mkahnisbent wrote: »

They aren't unsubstantiated generalisations. I provided links for where they say those things. Surely their own words are the best proof I can provide?

You provided Links to other reports that the authors wrote one of 232 pages in lenght. Could you show me the exact passages which suggest these people are extremists? Linking to a 232 page report that someone has written without a quotation backing up the claim you are making is not substantiation amnd I think you know it.

If you support the Swedish model then you believe men who have sex with prostitutes are commiting sexual assault.

Can you provide any substantiation to your wild claim that men who hire prostitutes in Sweden are charged with sexual assault?

Exact quotations to prove your point plkease if you can. Please dont just link to another lenghty report.

I'm afraid you won't like their answer. But of course, as you have clearly displayed, you have no interest in proof or balance.

Please show with quotes where I have displayed this.

My only comfort is people with your sort of opinions are the minority and tend to have little power or influence in the world. The proof of this is the fact that the world is becoming more liberal.

People of my opinion on this topic have sway in Sweden, a liberal country where prostution has been drastically reduced and many prostitutes rehabilitated there. Putting the blame where it belongs reaps rewards: On the gangsters who run the industry and on the morally bankrupt clients who demand prostitutes not knowing or caring if they are vulnerable or not, coerced or not, trafficked or not.

mkahnisbent wrote: »

If you open the document by Monica O'Connor, on the very first page they include this nice quote: “We, the survivors of prostitution and trafficking gathered at this press conference today, declare that prostitution is violence against women."

As a male, and given teh amount of vulnerable females in prostitution I would have to agree with that.

"In 1999, the Swedish government brought in legislation to criminalise the buying of sex, while decriminalising its sale. The idea behind the move was that prostitution should be regarded as an aspect of male violence against women and children and therefore tackled."

I asked you to substantiate your claim that men who hired prostitutes in Sweden were accused of sexual assault. Yet again a strawman reply.

You really need to read some alternative views about prostitution (especially the arguments made by prostitutes who are angry at being portrayed as victims)

Alternative views as in ones that support your viewpoint?

Like your claim that people in the HSE disagree with the Immigrant Council of Ireland report even though the HSE actually contributed to the report.

Your claim that the report said that all immigrant women were trafficked even though this would mean 900 women were trafficked not 102 as the report manitains.

Your claim that prostitutes not liking their jobs was similar to someone in McDonalds not liking their jobs even though there is evidence of severe physical damage and health problems for prostitutes, beatings (yes violence) by their employers, non payment and worse if the prostitute tries to get out.

Yes lets have some alternative sources from you for these your crazy ideas.



The most comprehensive study in Ireland was the one by the Immigrant Council of Ireland with contributions from the HSE. You have failed to tackle any points raised by it instead trying to attack the writers of the report.

If you were able to challenge any of the points in it you would. You cant so you try to assasinate the characters of the authors in ordr to discredit this report.

You have a very extreme, close minded opinion on this topic. Basing your opinions on what religious extremists or extremist feminists say isn't very clever.

In my last post I have asked you to quote from this thread where I have shown imbalance or extremism. You cant.

It is only you who say that the authors and contributors are religious extremists and extreme feminists. This claim has been soundly refuted yet you still make it. Again you attack the authors of the report because you are not able to attack the content.

The Gardai and HSE (where you work) contributed to this report. Some of the information on the trafficked women is from international authorities who have databases on trafficked women.

As stated earlier, you are the equivalent of a person getting their information about Islam from Osama Bin Laden.

(not a very good analogy for what you are trying to achieve. Osama would have a positive view of Islam. Maybe you are wise to step out of the debate at this stage.)

My sources are the immigrant council of Ireland, the Gardai, the HSE, Internationally recognised agencies with dtabases of trafficked women, Offiocial international reports on prostitution statistics, etc. etc.

Yours are and I paraphrase -I work in the HSE and people here dont agree with that report-

You couldnt show me documentation to prove that teh HSE opposed the report.
You had no comment to amke on teh fact that the HSE actually contributed to te report.

Enough siad I think.

AARRRGH wrote: »

Well done T Runner, you've managed to "win" the debate by exhausting everyone's patience.

If it means anything to you, I rang the Immigrant Council of Ireland last year to ask where they get their data from. Their answer? Ruhama. (I was writing an article about the sex industry at the time, and trying to figure out if all the negative stories came from Ruhama's office.)

Not that this matters to you of course. You've made it very clear you want to believe the extremists version of reality. Pity.

What Ive made clear is that those who are unable to refute arguments generally attack the arguer rather than the argument.

If I have won anargument it is because I am able and willing to backup my argument.

You are stating that Ruhama contributed to the article? This is true. We know this:

This research would not have been possible without the collaboration of the Women’s Health Project, Health Service Executive (HSE) and Ruhama.

Other sources included the Gardai, and official international organisations which keep records on trafficked women.

Yet you comment not on these other sources. Is the HSE a reliable source? Are the Garda Siochana a reliable source? You are unable to refute any of the valid points the report raises so you attack not its author but one of the sources that was used in compiling the report.

You cant provide any verifyable evidence to back any of your claims.

Well, apart from (paraphrasing) "I work in the HSE and they wouldnt touch taht report". When it was pointed out to that poster that not alone would the HSE touch it but they were one of the contributers to it......silence.

And now the same type of evidence: I compiled a report and they told me Ruhama contributed to it.

When you are able to supply an iota of evidence to back up any of your unfounded claims about prostition in Ireland or refute substantiated claims by others then lets have it.

The more you attack the authors of these reports, the more you show that you are lacking in any evidence for any of your arguments- then the more you are showing people that these arguments dont infact have any substance.

AARRRGH wrote: »

No you haven't. You just ignore everything people say.

Im afraid I have. there you go again making a statement without backing it up. I didnt ignore your ststement I just cant accept it because it doesnt stand up to reasoning and you cant back it up/ There is a difference.

You haven't been able to back up anything you've said with proper data.

Yes I have. I have used sources from the Swedish government to the Irish immigrant council which is the most relevant report published n this issue in Ireland to date. You have tried to discredit these sources but have failed. Claiming you rang up the Irish Immigrant Council and they said all their info is from Ruhama is not a reliable source. You do understand this?

Can you show me which bits are from the Gardai and HSE? I'd bet you anything it's less than 1% and was only used to give the document credibility.

Please show us some substantiation for that outrageous statement.
You simply cannot make crack-pot comments like that and expect people to believe it. Do you have any reason for saying that The Irish Immigrant Council have used the Gardai and the HSE in such a blatant way.

Why do you continuously fail to address any of the issues brought up from the report. Please tell us which parts of the report you have issues with and why and we can start from there.

Enough of tyrying to discredit its authors and sources.

You claimed you rang the immigrant council about a story you were doing on the sex industry. Can we have a link to this story please?

You are incredible. Me and many others have posted tons of evidence but somehow you are unable to see it. It's quite amazing. You are possibly the most in denial person I've ever come across on this website.

Remarkable really.

I very much doubt that. Again Ive considered your opinion and have rejected it as illogical. Just because my substantiated arguments dont match your unsubstantiated ones in no way means that I am in denial. Again I am not ignoring your argument, just rejecting it.