Gardai find naked man whipped on crucifix in Dublin club, naked audience watch

KiKi III wrote: »

I generally agree, but if you own the premises you get a say in what goes on there.

When they were doing nothing wrong why should he have a say?

If she can afford to live in Sandymount maybe we're all in the wrong line of work!

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

When they were doing nothing wrong why should he have a say?

They were breaking a number of laws by the looks of it... read the article

Mr. Karate wrote: »

We all have the right to a happy ending.

I must have missed that section of the Constitution

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

When they were doing nothing wrong why should he have a say?

Most of the audience were naked. At minimum he would have to get the seats cleaned - or if soft coverings replaced. Expensive. Probably not covered in the rent.

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Sex Workers in Ireland are more abused by the Government than anyone else. Sex Workers were the ones out protesting the change of laws in Ireland, they were the ones who were unrecognized, and again during this pandemic, they were abandoned and entitled to nothing. Every Tom Dick and Harry who worked an hour a week suddenly had 350 a week no questioned asked, but the Sex Workers were again abused and mistreated by the Government '' lets pretend they don't exist, give them nothing, let them rot'' its' not cool, they should have the same rights.

You can refer to them as “sex workers”, but in reality, they’re people who are engaged in prostitution. People who engage in prostitution aren’t being abused by the State, far too often they’re abused by the people who choose to exploit them.

There were only a handful of prostitutes protesting the change of laws in Ireland, along with Amnesty International led by Colm O’ Gorman who campaigned for what they called “sex workers rights”, as though being a prostitute is an immutable characteristic of a person, and not an occupation under which they would already be protected by employment law. That would of course mean having to pay tax like anyone else who is in employment, and the majority of prostitutes who weren’t out protesting, don’t want to pay tax either.

They were recognised at the time the same as anyone else, as submissions were invited from the public, same as any time new laws are introduced. They were also recognised during the pandemic as being entitled to the same entitlement as anyone else whether they were already in employment and engaging in prostitution as a nixer, or whether they were engaged in prostitution full time. They weren’t entitled to anything on the basis of engaging in prostitution.

No every Tom, Dick and Harry who worked an hour a week didn’t suddenly have 350 a week no questions asked, nor did anyone who was engaged in prostitution, nor did anyone pretend anyone didn’t exist. It depended upon their circumstances what anyone was or was not entitled to. People who are engaged in prostitution weren’t treated any differently to anyone and certainly weren’t abused and mistreated by Government. There were many who were abused by people who chose to exploit them though.

There was no pretending anyone doesn’t exist, there was no “give them nothing”, and people who engage in prostitution do have the same rights as everyone else in society, that’s precisely why the laws were introduced to protect people from being exploited by people who choose to exploit them. Far from being ignored and abused by the State, they are protected by the State the same laws which apply to everyone in Irish society. The State isn’t under any obligation to facilitate prostitution, which is essentially, exploitation.

That’s why the Gardaí raided the premises, not because some lad was having his arse whipped on stage while the audience looked on, but because the tenant was suspected of running a brothel which, under Irish law, is illegal. More and more, prostitution is being seen for what it is - modern slavery, exploitation, and no Government and no society is under any obligation to facilitate modern slavery and exploitation.

s1ippy wrote: »

The state wants a cut of their action without affording them the corresponding protections that a pimp would.

How do you make that out? The State isn’t interested in facilitating exploitation, and the only thing pimps are interested in protecting is their income. Pimps aren’t interested in protecting anyone else but themselves.

Day Lewin wrote: »

If the possibility of exploitation is your main gripe with sex work, would you'all think that a self-employed, safe, confident enterprising trade of sex work is perfectly OK?

There is a huge demand for it: always has been.

Why on earth pretend that it ain't so?

Because it makes the baby jesus cry.

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

When they were doing nothing wrong why should he have a say?

Well, the landlord's entitled to set specific terms in the contract to what the space can and can not be used for, especially if it's a business or entertainement setting. May have their own beliefs or ethics codes or even just doesn't want the hassle of dealing with neighbours.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Only speaking for myself, I wouldn’t be perfectly ok with it, I’d still see it as exploitation and facilitating prostitution as encouraging exploitation.

Why pretend there’s a huge demand for prostitution when there really isn’t? On any given day in Ireland there are about 1,000 people prostituting themselves, mostly women, touting for business from about 7,000 people, mostly men, who are looking to exploit them.

The only thing legitimising the industry does is lead to increased exploitation. Why pretend there’s a huge demand for prostitution when in all reality there isn’t? There’s a huge social stigma against it in Ireland.

Yes, you are demonstrating that stigma very clearly.
Why, though? Just propriety? A little out-dated, isn't it?
Of coyrse, a proper concern that workers shouldn't be exploited does you credit.
Not being hidden from legal scrutiny would be a great first step!
.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

You just saying it is slavery or exploitation does not mean it is however. It is people selling a service, with people buying that service. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Now slavery and exploitation might happen WITHIN that service, but that is entirely different. You can have the same thing happen with Nail Bars for example. Where people could be shipped from other countries, and held as slaves, to work in those nail bars. That does not mean there is anything wrong with nail bars, or that service.

Or the fact children were used in child slave labour to produce clothes for example. That does not mean clothing production was child slave labour. Clothes production is one thing. The slavery that was conducted within that industry was another.

A Freelance Sex Worker is using parts of their body to stimulate parts of the body of the client. A Freelance Masseure is doing EXACTLY the same thing. Yet somehow magically one is slavery and exploitation while the other is just a person with a business.

Why? I do not know, but it appears the "why" is solely to do with YOUR hang ups about sex and nothing more. One is wrong and the other not solely because of how YOU view sex and sexuality and nothing more.

How out of touch with reality must you be to equate a person being forced to have sex against their will, to a nail technician? Human trafficking of any kind is reprehensible but come on.

A lot of men in positions of authority, Judges, Politicians, high ranking army lads seem to go in for the whipping. Just reminded me of a Dub lad I worked with once on the buildings related a story to me of how when he worked as a bus conductor he met an old Sargent major who he made a business arrangement to whipp with a belt for 5punts per time. No sex involved infact the Dub lad was straight as a dye. I can still hear his reply when we asked did he hit him hard.. "da more I belted the shire oura him da more he liked it, screeching like a hyena he was" How we laughed down a soaking wet trench somewhere outside Hemel hampstead back in the glory days

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

We're talking human entrapment and slave labour here. Either's it's right or it's wrong. Scale doesn't come into it.

Scale does come in to it. Being raped numerous times is not the same as doing nails.

Pretending they are the same is completely disingenuous. Most people do feel differently about sex then other forms of work.

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

Scale does come in to it. Being raped numerous times is not the same as doing nails.

Pretending they are the same is completely disingenuous. Most people do feel differently about sex then other forms of work.

Exactly the point I made in my first point above. People FEEL it is different, so they act like it actually is different. But aside from Da Feelz, what actual differences can we lay out. I am sure someone held against their will and forced into slave labour is dreaming of freedom rather than simply saying "Ah sure, at least its not sex work".

The fact remains that in BOTH cases they are being held against their will and forced to do work as slaves. And in BOTH cases I would do everything in my power to free them. As I hope we all would.

What I would not, and will not ever, do is pretend that in one cases it says nothing about the industry, but in the other case it means the industry itself is by definition exploitation and slavery. If exploitation and slavery happens within any industry then THAT is bad. And it is enough that that is bad. We do not need to conflate it with the industry itself.

LawBoy2018 wrote: »

Ehh or maybe I can read? "A Freelance Sex Worker is using parts of their body to stimulate parts of the body of the client. A Freelance Masseure is doing EXACTLY the same thing. Yet somehow magically one is slavery and exploitation while the other is just a person with a business."

Maybe you can read. Maybe you can also shift goal posts. Because in the first post you referred to the part of my post about sex work and nail bars. In THIS post you are quoting and referring to an entirely different part of my post which was making an entirely different point to the other part of my post.

LawBoy2018 wrote: »

If you can provide evidence to show that even 20% of the 'sex worker industry' have entered such arrangements willfully, without any means of exploitation, then maybe your argument will have grounds.

Why should I have to? I believe in, and live in a society with a social justice system partially predicated on, the concept of "Innocent until proven guilty". It is not for me to provide the statistics on slavery and rape here. It is for the people indicting the industry of sex work.

However I am not sure why any particular % is relevant here? 20 seems random and arbitrary. Why not 10? Why not 70? My point would remain the same either way. If slavery happens in ANY industry.... that slavery is a bad thing. That does not automatically mean the industry itself is a bad thing.

Slavery, rape, and abuse happens in the world of sex work. I know this. You know this. It's a terrible thing. And we should do anything in our power to reduce that, preferably to zero. But that simply does NOT mean that sex work in and of itself is a problem or the problem.

I trust you think Freelance Massage is ok? If you don't then we need to have a different conversation. But assuming you do think it is ok..... would it suddenly not be ok tomorrow if the market was flooded with slave workers tomorrow? Or would the slavery itself not be the problem, rather than massage????

LawBoy2018 wrote: »

When the vast majority of the people involved in an 'industry' are dodgy/criminals/people being exploited, then it's only natural that reasonable people will condemn such practices.

As if "only natural" means it is a good thing, or the right thing, to do. However you have yet to substantiate the idea that the majority of the people involved fit that description, have you?

Again though, even if that was true it STILL does not indict the industry. Just the practices within it. Take another example. The meat industry. Some people think eating meat is a bad thing. That is one conversation. Other people think that eating meat is ok but how we treat our animals at this time in inhumane. THEY can see the same difference I am trying to explain to you. That the industry itself (the production and consumption of meat) is separate from the practices within that industry. And if we could clear up the malpractice and inhumanity of the current system..... then that is enough.

I would say the same of sex work. There is NOTHING wrong with sex work that I can see. If there are inhumane and awful practices within that industry at this time however, then we very much should try to clean that up.

The issue for ME is that most people can see everything I just said clearly and honestly and openly. UNTIL it suddenly comes to an industry THEY do not like. And whether they are against sex work, or eating of meat, or whatever.... they will suddenly based on their bias alone happily conflate the two things they would separate in any other conversation.

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

You just saying it is slavery or exploitation does not mean it is however. It is people selling a service, with people buying that service. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Now slavery and exploitation might happen WITHIN that service, but that is entirely different. You can have the same thing happen with Nail Bars for example. Where people could be shipped from other countries, and held as slaves, to work in those nail bars. That does not mean there is anything wrong with nail bars, or that service.

Or the fact children were used in child slave labour to produce clothes for example. That does not mean clothing production was child slave labour. Clothes production is one thing. The slavery that was conducted within that industry was another.

A Freelance Sex Worker is using parts of their body to stimulate parts of the body of the client. A Freelance Masseure is doing EXACTLY the same thing. Yet somehow magically one is slavery and exploitation while the other is just a person with a business.

Why? I do not know, but it appears the "why" is solely to do with YOUR hang ups about sex and nothing more. One is wrong and the other not solely because of how YOU view sex and sexuality and nothing more.

You can’t get AIDS from giving someone a massage (or syphillis, or herpes etc)

You can’t get pregnant from giving someone a massage.

Violence and rape against masseurs is not a common problem.

Pretending they are the same thing is disingenuous in the extreme.