Those nuns who ran the Magdelene Laundries...

Mr. Loverman · 22-08-2012 08:24AM #1

There are a group of nuns called the Good Shepherd Sisters and Our Lady of Charity Sisters who used to run the Magdelene Laundries and now run an organisation called Ruhama.

For about 7 years they ran both the Magdelene Laundries and Ruhama at the same time.

For those of you who don't know, the Magdelene Laundries were forced labour camps for prostitutes. They have since been closed down but the nuns refuse to accept they did anything wrong and are yet to apologise.

Ruhama is their new organisation for dealing with prostitution. (Obviously they cannot use labour camps anymore as they are outlawed.)

They believe all prostitution is forced prostitution and all foreign prostitutes are trafficked prostitutes.

They run a campaign called www.turnofftheredlight.ie which is in direct conflict with the campaign run by sex workers in Ireland, www.turnoffthebluelight.ie

Due to their history we know these women are "misguided" and we know they unapologetically committed tens of thousands of criminal acts including kidnapping and forced labour, yet for some reason the media continues to publish their stories without asking for evidence or mentioning their history.

For example, RTE currently has this story as one of their headlines: http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0822/prostitution-support-group-sees-cases-increase.html

They claim they helped 200 trafficked women last year. They have made similar claims for many, many years. Yet, there have been hardly any arrests nevermind any convictions.

I understand the media have slow news days and will publish press releases as news, but please, these are the same people who ran the Magdelene Laundries.

The also receive over EUR 700,000 in funding from the government each year.

Does anyone else have a problem with this?

Gummy Panda · 22-08-2012 08:34AM

Didn't prime time expose the turn off the blue light website as being run by pimps. I remember they're tried going to address but it was a rundown building

Mr. Loverman · 22-08-2012 08:36AM

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Didn't prime time expose the turn off the blue light website as being run by pimps. I remember they're tried going to address but it was a rundown building

Is this the recent prime time programme which was created in conjunction with Ruhama?

Dyr · 22-08-2012 08:44AM

Are these the ones who want to make only the demand side of prostitution illegal?

Nice bunch alright

tigger123 · 22-08-2012 08:46AM

Bambi wrote: »

Are these the ones who want to make only the demand side of prostitution illegal?

Nice bunch alright

What's wrong with making the demand side illegal? I think it's the way forward tbh, stop criminalising these women.

Gummy Panda · 22-08-2012 08:46AM

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Gummy Panda wrote: »

Didn't prime time expose the turn off the blue light website as being run by pimps. I remember they're tried going to address but it was a rundown building

Is this the recent prime time programme which was created in conjunction with Ruhama?

So you are saying rte were lying about who owes the domain and that there is no office for that group?

Mr. Loverman · 22-08-2012 08:49AM

tigger123 wrote: »

What's wrong with making the demand side illegal? I think it's the way forward tbh, stop criminalising these women.

I understand we all have different opinions on how to best deal with prostitution.

If possible, can we keep this thread about how Ruhama are given free press and government funding and generally go unquestioned?

Dyr · 22-08-2012 08:50AM

tigger123 wrote: »

What's wrong with making the demand side illegal? I think it's the way forward tbh, stop criminalising these women.

Pretty much everything

hoodwinked · 22-08-2012 08:51AM

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

I understand we all have different opinions on how to best deal with prostitution.

If possible, can we keep this thread about how Ruhama are given free press and government funding and generally go unquestioned?

just to add they go unquestioned not just by the public and governments but in their own organisations too! :mad:

Mr. Loverman · 22-08-2012 08:51AM

Gummy Panda wrote: »

So you are saying rte were lying about who owes the domain and that there is no office for that group?

I would not be surprised if pimps were also involved in running that website. After all, it is not just prostitutes who make money from prostitution.

You may also be interested in this website: http://www.sexworkersallianceireland.org/index.html

Do you agree Ruhama are a problematic organisation?

Joey the lips · 22-08-2012 08:53AM

I find that if you listen long enough you are clouded by both arguements so i can only go with my mind and i dont agree with prostitution. I agree the best way to tackle it is to criminalize the buying rather than selling

Rochelle · 22-08-2012 08:56AM

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Does anyone else have a problem with this?

No, I couldn't care less.

tigger123 · 22-08-2012 08:56AM

Bambi wrote: »

Pretty much everything

So you think prostitutes should be punished, while those who avail of their services walk free?

copeyhagen · 22-08-2012 08:57AM

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

For those of you who don't know, the Magdelene Laundries were forced labour camps for prostitutes.

err, were they not more for young women that had had children out of wedlock

Dravokivich · 22-08-2012 09:00AM

tigger123 wrote: »

What's wrong with making the demand side illegal? I think it's the way forward tbh, stop criminalising these women.

The women aren't being criminalised in any way. It is only illegal to solicit.

If Ruhuma truly had a problem with human trafficking, they wouldn't be going after the punters.

dharma200 · 22-08-2012 09:01AM

It is just one of many examples of the church/state collusion in Ireland.

Any involevment of any person or organisation linked with the magdelene laundries should not be allowed to work with any vulnerable people, prostitutes or not. Also the state should not fund organisations that are not impartial and/or have religious leanings.

My opinion.

Criminalising prostitutes is ridiculous.

Mr. Loverman · 22-08-2012 09:01AM

copeyhagen wrote: »

err, were they not more for young women that had had children out of wedlock

The goal of the organisation was to "rehabilitate prostitutes", but you are partially correct, they did also take some single mothers. Most of their victims were prostitutes though.

krudler · 22-08-2012 09:01AM

copeyhagen wrote: »

err, were they not more for young women that had had children out of wedlock

Among other things, disgraceful part of Irish history

tigger123 · 22-08-2012 09:06AM

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

The goal of the organisation was to "rehabilitate prostitutes", but you are partially correct, they did also take some single mothers. Most of their victims were prostitutes though.

Do you have any source to back this up? I never heard anything about a connection between the Magdelane Laundries and prostitution ... ???

Mr. Loverman · 22-08-2012 09:11AM

tigger123 wrote: »

Do you have any source to back this up? I never heard anything about a connection between the Magdelane Laundries and prostitution ... ???

The organisation was created to "help" prostitutes but was later expanded to include "promiscuous" women.

Their name, Magdalene, comes from the reformed prostitute Mary Magdalene.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/world/europe/25iht-abuse25.html?_r=4

Mr. Loverman · 22-08-2012 09:12AM

tigger123 wrote: »

Do you have any source to back this up? I never heard anything about a connection between the Magdelane Laundries and prostitution ... ???

Do you agree Ruhama are a problematic organisation?

eth0 · 22-08-2012 09:13AM

The name Ruhama always reminds me of this lad's book

kunst nugget · 22-08-2012 09:21AM

tigger123 wrote: »

Do you have any source to back this up? I never heard anything about a connection between the Magdelane Laundries and prostitution ... ???

Magdalene laundries were originally rehabilitation centres for prostitutes (after Mary Magdalene) but they went on to take any 'fallen woman' because of the free labour they provided which made the laundries profitable.

http://leahlefler.hubpages.com/hub/Magdalene-Laundries-in-Ireland-and-Across-the-Western-World

discus · 22-08-2012 09:23AM

dharma200 wrote: »

Criminalising prostitutes is ridiculous.

Agreed, and criminalising the customers is ridiculous too.

WhatNowForUs? · 22-08-2012 09:31AM

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

The organisation was created to "help" prostitutes but was later expanded to include "promiscuous" women.

Their name, Magdalene, comes from the reformed prostitute Mary Magdalene.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/world/europe/25iht-abuse25.html?_r=4

Hi, I can't get in there without logging on. However I never heard that the majority of girls in there were prostitutes, I'm sure there were some.
What I believe is that it was predomanitly for out of wed lock mothers. This back then I presume in the warped minds of the church, state and society would have meant that the women would have been considered prostitutes.

liamhana · 22-08-2012 09:31AM

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Do you agree Ruhama are a problematic organisation?

Ridiculous assumption that there is anything not above board with Ruhama...

fact is most long serving NGOs/Charities in Ireland have some past that involves orphanages/laundries etc Not a 'glorious' past or something to be proud of but Ruhama is a Legit organisation with a board made up of lay people and funded on the basis of work plans/audited accounts etc.

Trying to say they are problematic is like saying we shouldnt support Trocaire or Vincent de Paul who both have their past/present in catholic organisations.

they are only one of the groups that support the turn off the red light project, which is up front and named...the blue light campaign? a piece of pimp led crap. Nearly 100% of prostitution in ireland is pimped and therefore forced....websites are controlled by gangs/pimps and nearly all girls are moved around the place.
Any 'buyer' should be named and shamed.

Dyr · 22-08-2012 09:34AM

tigger123 wrote: »

So you think prostitutes should be punished, while those who avail of their services walk free?

I said that?

I think creating situations where one party to an illegal transaction is immune to prosecution is retarded.

tigger123 · 22-08-2012 09:37AM

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

Do you agree Ruhama are a problematic organisation?

Not based on anything you've posted here.

I had no idea they were backed by a religous organisation.

kunst nugget · 22-08-2012 09:40AM

liamhana wrote: »

Ridiculous assumption that there is anything not above board with Ruhama...

fact is most long serving NGOs/Charities in Ireland have some past that involves orphanages/laundries etc Not a 'glorious' past or something to be proud of but Ruhama is a Legit organisation with a board made up of lay people and funded on the basis of work plans/audited accounts etc.

Trying to say they are problematic is like saying we shouldnt support Trocaire or Vincent de Paul who both have their past/present in catholic organisations.

But they were still running the Magdalene laundries for 7 years after they set up this organisation. I would prefer an organisation to help the people out there that didn't have a heavily religious bias like Ruhama.

liamhana wrote: »

they are only one of the groups that support the turn off the red light project, which is up front and named...the blue light campaign? a piece of pimp led crap. Nearly 100% of prostitution in ireland is pimped and therefore forced....websites are controlled by gangs/pimps and nearly all girls are moved around the place.

I presume you have facts to back this up?
Here is an interesting perspective from the other side of the coin:
http://storiesfrombehindtheredlight.wordpress.com/2012/03/03/acceptanc/

liamhana wrote: »

Any 'buyer' should be named and shamed.

Why not legalise prostitution and regulate it instead? Makes more sense to me.

omega666 · 22-08-2012 09:42AM

liamhana wrote: »

Ridiculous assumption that there is anything not above board with Ruhama...

fact is most long serving NGOs/Charities in Ireland have some past that involves orphanages/laundries etc Not a 'glorious' past or something to be proud of but Ruhama is a Legit organisation with a board made up of lay people and funded on the basis of work plans/audited accounts etc.

Trying to say they are problematic is like saying we shouldnt support Trocaire or Vincent de Paul who both have their past/present in catholic organisations.

they are only one of the groups that support the turn off the red light project, which is up front and named...the blue light campaign? a piece of pimp led crap. Nearly 100% of prostitution in ireland is pimped and therefore forced....websites are controlled by gangs/pimps and nearly all girls are moved around the place.
Any 'buyer' should be named and shamed.

Clearly you know nothing about prosititution in Ireland.

Mr. Loverman · 22-08-2012 09:50AM

Mr. Loverman wrote:

Do you agree Ruhama are a problematic organisation?

tigger123 wrote: »

Not based on anything you've posted here.

Even though they are the same people who ran the Magdelene Laundries and ran Ruhama concurrently for 7 years?

I am surprised and saddened you have no problem with this.

Those nuns who ran the Magdelene Laundries...

Comments