RTE report: Bill makes purchasing sexual services an offence

P. Breathnach · 29-11-2014 10:01PM

tritium wrote: »

Jesus not this men are the bad guys stuff again! Sure why not, its far more likely that Marys drug addict boyfriend is forcing her into prostitution than that she's decided to do this herself, l dunno, possibly to feed her own habit, or maybe for less sinister reasons.

Under the model you offer women are just poor little helpless victims of the patriarchy. Ironically the women affected by this legislation were effectively excluded from contributing to the debate by a block of idealogues- I never thought I'd see the day when elements from both the Church and Irelands left wing feminists were lined up shoulder to shoulder in defence of Victorian values

How about dealing what I said rather than what you suppose I said? After all, my post is still available to be read. I suggested that the numbers of women forced into prostitution by men were a small proportion of those in the business, but that any women who were in such a situation were entitled to protection.

Sand · 29-11-2014 10:59PM

I cant see these sort of laws doing anything positive. Prostitution will continue to occur as it has throughout time. Prostitutes will be forced to take *more* risks and will be *less* safe as they will have to take *more* chances to protect their clients from prosecution. It will do nothing to combat trafficking, to whatever extent that actually occurs.

Of course, its not designed to do so, which is why the views of actual sex workers are ignored. Religious nut-jobs and feminist extremists have joined forces on this one, so you can be sure their brainstorming session will deliver something special in its stupidity. The idea that they are concerned with the protection of women is a fallacy.

The only grown up thing to do is to decriminalise it (which is not the same as endorsing it), regulating it and taxing it. Its happening anyway, might as well make it as safe and boring as possible for all concerned.

steveone · 29-11-2014 11:05PM

Sh1tbag OToole wrote: »

Why would someone want to pay for sexual services anyway? Pure daft thing to be doing now..

Disabled? Socially awkward? Have they not got a right to the experience? Like everything else in ireland, because a few arseholes cant be trusted to behave the whole nation suffers. Usual ****e.

Sand · 29-11-2014 11:06PM

steveone wrote: »

Disabled? Socially awkward? Have they not got a right to the experience? Like everything else in ireland, because a few arseholes cant be trusted to behave the whole nation suffers. Usual ****e.

A right? No - I don't recall that article in the constitution or the declaration of human rights.

steveone · 29-11-2014 11:11PM

Sand wrote: »

A right? No - I don't recall that article in the constitution or the declaration of human rights.

So a human being is not entitled to sexual intercourse? As it involves a biological process is there similar provision for say going to the toilet?

UCDVet · 29-11-2014 11:17PM

steveone wrote: »

So a human being is not entitled to sexual intercourse? As it involves a biological process is there similar provision for say going to the toilet?

I think 'entitled' is too strong a word here. Sexual intercourse requires more than one person to participate and, well, if there is nobody willing to have sex with someone, that someone isn't *entitled* to force someone.

Having said that, I agree with you (outside the choice of wording). If someone is willing to have sex with me, but only if I do ________ for them....well, that's totally reasonable. Nobody would come and fix my sink unless I do _______ for them. And even though I'm happily married, there is no way my wife and I would be together if not for me doing lots of ___________ for my wife.

I don't see any reason to arbitrarily restrict what exchanges involving sex are legal.

steveone · 29-11-2014 11:27PM

UCDVet wrote: »

I think 'entitled' is too strong a word here. Sexual intercourse requires more than one person to participate and, well, if there is nobody willing to have sex with someone, that someone isn't *entitled* to force someone.

Having said that, I agree with you (outside the choice of wording). If someone is willing to have sex with me, but only if I do ________ for them....well, that's totally reasonable. Nobody would come and fix my sink unless I do _______ for them. And even though I'm happily married, there is no way my wife and I would be together if not for me doing lots of ___________ for my wife.

I don't see any reason to arbitrarily restrict what exchanges involving sex are legal.

Entitled might be strong but i feel it is the word to use, people because of this will be deprived what is a fundemental part of existance, naturally its not going to be the catalog model staning at the bar it'll be vulnerable or lesser perfect people..... It would be nice to tread softly around it but once legislation
is enforced the discretion is removed. Easier to ban commercial sex than deal with the exploitative who'll just find something else to control anyway

hatrickpatrick · 29-11-2014 11:59PM

P. Breathnach wrote: »

How about dealing what I said rather than what you suppose I said? After all, my post is still available to be read. I suggested that the numbers of women forced into prostitution by men were a small proportion of those in the business, but that any women who were in such a situation were entitled to protection.

No one's going to disagree with that, but the traditional Irish sledgehammer approach which regards harming legitimate people as "fair collateral damage" isn't any more appropriate in dealing with sex as it is in dealing with literally anything else.
Not only is it wrong, it has also literally never worked.

PizzamanIRL · 30-11-2014 12:07AM

Why is sex such a taboo? If I want to ride a hooker I should be allowed to without being looked at twice. Fecking peeping toms.

P. Breathnach · 30-11-2014 12:23AM

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

No one's going to disagree with that...

Would that this were true! I wrote the post in response to somebody disagreeing with me.

but the traditional Irish sledgehammer approach which regards harming legitimate people as "fair collateral damage" isn't any more appropriate in dealing with sex as it is in dealing with literally anything else.

The problem is the definition of "legitimate people". Most people here seem to believe that if a man contracts with a woman for sexual services, and the woman enters in the arrangement freely, that is acceptable. Under the present law, the woman is not acting legitimately; under the proposed new law, the man is the one who would be deemed not to be acting legitimately. There seems to be a desire within certain parts of the establishment to deem a contract for sexual services to be wrong.

In my view, a contract for sexual services should have no different standing in law than any other contract for services (including the right to sue for non-performance of the terms of the contract).

There is a need for legal protection of people who are coerced or exploited unfairly.

Not only is it wrong, it has also literally never worked.

Not to any useful extent, anyway. Imagine a man contracts an escort for in in-call. When he meets her, he forms the impression that something is not quite right, and that she might be an unwilling participant. If the new legislation is passed, he can hardly go to the Gardaí to report a concern that she might be coerced into the sex industry.

tritium · 30-11-2014 01:09PM

P. Breathnach wrote: »

How about dealing what I said rather than what you suppose I said? After all, my post is still available to be read. I suggested that the numbers of women forced into prostitution by men were a small proportion of those in the business, but that any women who were in such a situation were entitled to protection.

I'm not attacking you PB I'm attacking the mindset that's justifying the bill and the Swedish approach. Its predicated on the idea of criminalising men on the implausible basis that prostitutes are invariably forced into this by evil *men*. The bill isn't about helping sex workers, they were ignored in the draftin of it, its about advancing dogma, ironically a combined left wing feminist and extreme religious dogma

There's already plenty if remedy for anyone forced to do this or any other act by anyone else. This bilk won't imprive on that in any way. All it does is take Ireland back to Victorian values by treating sex as some kind of sacrosanct item to be controlled for our own good. Sadly its also taken the focus off other flaws in Irish sexual crime legislation (some of which the bill actually seems to try to fix, many others of which it ignores)

Cantremember · 30-11-2014 01:22PM

It's hard to argue against trying to protect people from being trafficked. Will this approach be effective? Time will tell. I'm curious about payment and how it's defined. Does it include benefit in kind? You know if you're paying for the drinks and the meals and the accommodation with a view to getting laid and you succeed...have you "paid" for it?

tritium · 30-11-2014 02:27PM

Cantremember wrote: »

It's hard to argue against trying to protect people from being trafficked. Will this approach be effective? Time will tell. I'm curious about payment and how it's defined. Does it include benefit in kind? You know if you're paying for the drinks and the meals and the accommodation with a view to getting laid and you succeed...have you "paid" for it?

How many confirmed cases of trafficking have we had? I seem to remember ruhama et all nearly wetting themselves over that mentally disturbed Australian girl a while ago because they thought they'd finally found one.

Cienciano · 30-11-2014 02:35PM

tritium wrote: »

How many confirmed cases of trafficking have we had? I seem to remember ruhama et all nearly wetting themselves over that mentally disturbed Australian girl a while ago because they thought they'd finally found one.

They were on Vincent Brown before saying STD rates in sex workers were at a rate of 95%. Then later in the show you find out their sample came from street workers in Nairobi. Seriously. I wouldn't believe a word out of their mouths.
When the nuns that ran the Magdalene Laundries are telling us what's good for women you know you're going to get bullshít

RDM_83 again · 30-11-2014 02:56PM

tritium wrote: »

How many confirmed cases of trafficking have we had? I seem to remember ruhama et all nearly wetting themselves over that mentally disturbed Australian girl a while ago because they thought they'd finally found one.

Even going from a purely amoral standpoint (which those that would be involved in trafficking would be) I just don't think the economics in terms of risk vs reward really make sense for forced trafficking to be a major issue in Ireland.
The risk is fairly high in terms of the potential sentences and would require a substantial effort.
The reward would be fairly limited, a greater cut of the profits, offset against a much greater effort in terms of 'security' and control.
I would imagine the returns on prostitution in Ireland would be fairly huge, why would you bother deceiving, transporting someone across countries against their will, having the expense of keeping them locked up and watched constantly and having to keep them hidden. When there is women already within the sex industry in countries where the returns would be much lower that if offered would presumably take up the opportunity to earn a much higher amount doing the same work e.g they would take up a pimps/managers offer of transport to Ireland.

I do think there is forced prostitution, I do think there is probably coercion involved for some women, I do think those involved in the sex industry probably "import" women to work in it. I just don't think at a cynical profit vs risk orientated level (which is how organised crime works) there is a "need" to carry out large scale forced trafficking of sex workers.

Fred Swanson · 30-11-2014 03:00PM

This post has been deleted.

eviltwin · 30-11-2014 03:06PM

RDM_83 again wrote: »

I do think there is forced prostitution, I do think there is probably coercion involved for some women, I do think those involved in the sex industry probably "import" women to work in it. I just don't think at a cynical profit vs risk orientated level (which is how organised crime works) there is a "need" to carry out large scale forced trafficking of sex workers.

This is true, in my previous job I worked with a lot of women who were sex workers because of their partner's drug debts, because they were here illegally and threatened with the authorities and women who were just financially very badly off who needed money. None of them wanted to be having sex with these men but felt they had no choice. They were the extreme cases because they came to me after being attacked or raped, they had no protection, they couldn't go to the gardai and they were extremely vulnerable. Its a very dangerous profession, getting into a car with a stranger or going to a house to have a meeting with someone who has booked you online is a massive risk. Its also a risk for the punter all of which makes it crazy that we still keep prostitution illegal. I know most people don't like the idea of someone selling their body and allowing it to be used in that way but its a fact of life. Make it legal, regulate it and it will be a whole lot safer, then maybe the authorities can focus on the people being exploited.

NelsonVanAlden · 30-11-2014 04:46PM

eviltwin wrote: »

This is true, in my previous job I worked with a lot of women who were sex workers because of their partner's drug debts, because they were here illegally and threatened with the authorities and women who were just financially very badly off who needed money. None of them wanted to be having sex with these men but felt they had no choice. They were the extreme cases because they came to me after being attacked or raped, they had no protection, they couldn't go to the gardai and they were extremely vulnerable. Its a very dangerous profession, getting into a car with a stranger or going to a house to have a meeting with someone who has booked you online is a massive risk. Its also a risk for the punter all of which makes it crazy that we still keep prostitution illegal. I know most people don't like the idea of someone selling their body and allowing it to be used in that way but its a fact of life. Make it legal, regulate it and it will be a whole lot safer, then maybe the authorities can focus on the people being exploited.

Agreed. Legalization and regulation is the only way to combat sex trafficking, sadly that aint going to happen here anytime soon. The Nevada model seems to be the best route to go in terms of setting regulations for prostitution.

RDM_83 again · 30-11-2014 05:16PM

eviltwin wrote: »

This is true, in my previous job I worked with a lot of women who were sex workers because of their partner's drug debts, because they were here illegally and threatened with the authorities and women who were just financially very badly off who needed money. None of them wanted to be having sex with these men but felt they had no choice. They were the extreme cases because they came to me after being attacked or raped, they had no protection, they couldn't go to the gardai and they were extremely vulnerable. Its a very dangerous profession, getting into a car with a stranger or going to a house to have a meeting with someone who has booked you online is a massive risk. Its also a risk for the punter all of which makes it crazy that we still keep prostitution illegal. I know most people don't like the idea of someone selling their body and allowing it to be used in that way but its a fact of life. Make it legal, regulate it and it will be a whole lot safer, then maybe the authorities can focus on the people being exploited.

Is there a counter point to the idea that legalization will correct the problems with prostitution though. As you say in your post people are coerced or forced into this work for a multitude of reasons, will legalization actually stop any of these methods or causes, it will still probably involve trapped or vulnerable people entering the industry.
The reason I think that legalization possibly isn't the answer is that it may increase demand*, look at much of europe, visiting prostitutes is more socially acceptable, yes legalization would probably help prevent some of the worst abuses but I can't see that it would prevent the less obvious issues while probably drawing more people into the industry.
Honestly I am not sure if there is any magic solution around this issue.

*Its fashionable to say legalization doesn't increase demand or usage but I think that at least from my own experience as an example, when legal highs were present my friends did a lot more of them and people that wouldn't go out of their way to get speed or coke were trying them if something is available easily without risk more people will do it.

looking_around · 30-11-2014 07:02PM

RDM_83 again wrote: »

Is there a counter point to the idea that legalization will correct the problems with prostitution though. As you say in your post people are coerced or forced into this work for a multitude of reasons, will legalization actually stop any of these methods or causes, it will still probably involve trapped or vulnerable people entering the industry.
The reason I think that legalization possibly isn't the answer is that it may increase demand*, look at much of europe, visiting prostitutes is more socially acceptable, yes legalization would probably help prevent some of the worst abuses but I can't see that it would prevent the less obvious issues while probably drawing more people into the industry.
Honestly I am not sure if there is any magic solution around this issue.

*Its fashionable to say legalization doesn't increase demand or usage but I think that at least from my own experience as an example, when legal highs were present my friends did a lot more of them and people that wouldn't go out of their way to get speed or coke were trying them if something is available easily without risk more people will do it.

So what if demand is increased?

If women aren't happy with it, but are there for financial reasons, they will work their way out of it. Maybe the country could make it legal and have an emphasis on ways to climb out of that industry. (ie college etc.)

This is of course assuming that the majority of prostitutes are forced via financial reasons/drugs etc.
I might be wrong but, I think the majority are prostitutes by choice. It's not exactly the worst job out there.

If it did increase demand, maybe it would also increase employment? and tax? I'm not imagining it's the answer to employment problems of course...but it surely helps to have another employment option?

gozunda · 30-11-2014 11:45PM

Yuri Checkov wrote: »

As a regular user of escorts and escort websites I feel I must comment.

I use escorts maybe twice a month and I have never hurt anyone by my actions. To me it is just a hobby, some people collect stamps, I likes to have sex with beautiful ladies. That is my business. I am not driving around the city centre slowly being a dick, everything is done off street and is fully above board. The lady wants to be in the line of work she is in, we are both happy with the business relationship.

Ok fixed that for you..

to me it's just a hobby...I likes to pay to have sex with beautiful ladies.

Erhh that perhaps the strangest thing I have came across yet... Your declared 'hobby' is paying to have sex. Yup That would look real good on a CV I reckon. Paying to have sex - that happens but "a hobby" - seriously?

Whatever about sexual activity, denoting it as a hobby is a bit weird imo. Having sex with someone is a helluva lot more than playing a game of tennis or tiddlywinks.

The other point of course is that Anyone paying for sex should consider that some sex workers may have little choice in what they are doing and may not be that 'happy' about it and neither is it a career that individuals can usually declare to their family or children without the risk of sometime serious repercussions for them.

Ya most sex workers do it for money - but as a current career choice it scrapes the bottom of the barrel in terms of ambition or career planning.

kjl · 30-11-2014 11:58PM

SeanW wrote: »

People who have disabilities for one thing.

like being pathologically ugly?

gozunda · 01-12-2014 12:01AM

looking_around wrote: »

So what if demand is increased?

If women aren't happy with it, but are there for financial reasons, they will work their way out of it. Maybe the country could make it legal and have an emphasis on ways to climb out of that industry. (ie college etc.)

This is of course assuming that the majority of prostitutes are forced via financial reasons/drugs etc.
I might be wrong but, I think the majority are prostitutes by choice. It's not exactly the worst job out there.

If it did increase demand, maybe it would also increase employment? and tax? I'm not imagining it's the answer to employment problems of course...but it surely helps to have another employment option?

Don't forget there are male sex workers - prostitution is not just limited to women.

On the bit highlighted - what makes prostitution an attractive career choice - seriously?

Sex workers on the street and even indoors may face potential violence by the nature of the work involved.

Workers risk disease and woman pregnancy where protection fails or things go wrong.
Emotionally it can only be a tough choice. If the sex worker has a partner/wife/husband/children how does prostitution effect them and their relationships.

I think too often the individual is too often forgotten in the arguments about prostitution - it's not the same as buying a commodity in a shop and that is why it is an area fraught with difficulties - whether it be legislation or legalising it.

Neither is it a job that a person can boast to their mammy about or update their FB status to tell the world that they are taking up screwing random strangers for money.

Yup people do take it up as a way to make money but I don't for a minute believe it is an easy way to make a living.

Neyite · 01-12-2014 12:22AM

looking_around wrote: »

So what if demand is increased?

If women aren't happy with it, but are there for financial reasons, they will work their way out of it. Maybe the country could make it legal and have an emphasis on ways to climb out of that industry. (ie college etc.)

This is of course assuming that the majority of prostitutes are forced via financial reasons/drugs etc.
I might be wrong but, I think the majority are prostitutes by choice. It's not exactly the worst job out there.

If it did increase demand, maybe it would also increase employment? and tax? I'm not imagining it's the answer to employment problems of course...but it surely helps to have another employment option?

I dunno. Having sex with someone you are physically repulsed by cant be pleasant. I imagine its even tougher for people who don't really want to sell their bodies but its the only way they can earn the money they need.

I think it should be a regulated industry with tough sentences for pimps or madams. Licences or ID checks for the sex workers with access to police support and healthcare such as sti checks, sexual health information and treatments, addiction support etc.

But Ireland would never be that forward thinking.

Annasopra · 01-12-2014 12:26AM

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Not necessarily. A lot of bills that are started don't get completely scrapped.

WoollyRedHat · 01-12-2014 12:30AM

Was wondering what Bill O'Herlihy was up to since he left RTE>

Nomis21 · 01-12-2014 01:10AM

As a driver on the London-Amsterdam bus route, I met many girls who used to be prostitutes and those travelling to Amsterdam who wanted to be prostitutes.

There are no dutch girls in the 'Windows' these days. Any girl with an EU passport can hire a window for about 100 Euro a day. Others, mostly Russian, work in the brothels. When I lived on my own in Holland I was sometimes a customer at one of the brothels. It was clean, safe, efficient and not overly expensive as it was aimed at people who lived in the city. The girls spoke good english and (seemed to) enjoy their work. The brothels satisfied a need. Why not...?

I did meet girls who had been messed up by their experience of selling their bodies for sex. They nearly all don't trust men any more. How can they sleep with a guy they find repulsive?... Drugs, drugs and more drugs, usually cocaine. Drugs and prostitution go together like "A horse and carriage." Another serious problem this.

J Mysterio · 01-12-2014 10:29AM

mariaalice wrote: »

What country in the world can you do all of the above?

Netherlands.

01-12-2014 10:34AM

SeanW wrote: »

Essentially, Ireland is to implement the Swedish model on sex work. I.E. the buyer is always a criminal.

I was reading the other day the swedish model has pretty much fcuked things up for the workers??

Neyite wrote: »

I dunno. Having sex with someone you are physically repulsed by cant be pleasant. I imagine its even tougher for people who don't really want to sell their bodies but its the only way they can earn the money they need.

I think it should be a regulated industry with tough sentences for pimps or madams. Licences or ID checks for the sex workers with access to police support and healthcare such as sti checks, sexual health information and treatments, addiction support etc.

But Ireland would never be that forward thinking.

I think so too

looking_around · 01-12-2014 10:36AM

Neyite wrote: »

I dunno. Having sex with someone you are physically repulsed by cant be pleasant. I imagine its even tougher for people who don't really want to sell their bodies but its the only way they can earn the money they need.

you realise, those who choose that work can and do refuse. if they are so repulsd, they'll just say no.

RTE report: Bill makes purchasing sexual services an offence

Comments