Britain's sex trade needs tackling | Denis MacShane | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

Quote:

A powerful three-part Channel 4 series on sex slave trafficking promised more than it delivered. Its timing was excellent: the three-hour film was shown in the week the Guardian revealed the government's decision to opt out of the new EU directive on sex slave trafficking. Twenty years ago a Tory government opted out of EU directives protecting workers. Today David Cameron and Nick Clegg are opting out of a directive aimed at protecting teenagers and young women from being trafficked into the UK's burgeoning brothel and massage parlour industry. With luck the C4 documentary should alert public opinion to this depressing aspect of globalisation and the new patriarchalism which obliges young women to "have sex with 10 to 15 men a day against their will" as one detective constable told the film-makers. Shot and edited with consummate skill with a breathy linking commentary read by Helen Mirren in the style of Laurence Olivier declaiming the World at War script, the programme eschewed analysis in favour of showing police work in close-up detail. Two small west country forces co-operated fully with C4. The officers came over as decent, good men with female officers on the margin to help arrest women pimps and their victims. But a huge amount of police time and work, including a trip to Thailand for Devon and Cornwall officers, results in a meagre haul. Minor Chinese and Thai pimps get prison sentences of between 12 and 18 months. At the same time there were court cases against Albanian and Slovakian pimps which resulted in longer prison sentences and details of the most brutal cruelty against trafficked women. There is no shortage of cases in all major cities, though it is not clear why the Devon and Cornwall or Gloucestershire chief constables agreed to co-operate with C4 rather than the Met where more dramatic examples of trafficking abound. But the documentary noted that the Home Office is winding down the Pentameter operations against trafficking. Mirren concluded: "You will find brothels and victims in every English town. Those individuals who use these brothels should think about what they are doing and stop using these services." Thanks, Helen. Actually it is British men – not genderless "individuals" – who insist on a right to put money down and insert their penises into women's bodies. Serving this demand has led to massive increase in the supply of prostituted women. There is a sterile debate over numbers which C4 sensibly ignored. Getting the figures is impossible. The United Nations' International Labour Organisation says there are 2.45 million women trafficked into sex slavery worldwide. The Red Cross and other global outfits also insist that millions of women are traded. The idea Britain has only a few is laughable, despite a report in the Guardian by Nick Davies claiming that sex slave trafficking was hugely exaggerated. ACPO produced a report recently which talked of 4,000 trafficked women but British NGOs who work with the victims of sex slave trafficking criticised the methodology of ACPO's work and said the figure was much higher. An organisation called the English Collective of Prostitutes, which has spokespersons but no details of membership or finances, is always available for Newsnight or the Guardian to pooh-pooh the problem of trafficking into or within Britain. Its solution is to legalise prostitution. Where this has been tried as in Nevada, the death and injury rate of prostituted women rises and students at universities in the US state believe it is impossible to rape a prostituted woman. The C4 film avoided this debate or any effort to examine the ideology of male oppression that lies behind the extraordinary growth in sex trafficking. Detectives held up adverts in the Southampton Echo placed by one of the pimps in which "fresh" bodies were on offer for the delight of Southampton men. There was no challenge to the newspaper editors who are complicit in the sex slave industry by carrying adverts for sexual services. After one raid, a detective talks to a punter and politely asks him to stay in touch. But there is no arrest even though a brave group of Labour women ministers and MPs changed the law to make it a crime to pay for sex with a victim who has been coerced in any way into working as a prostitute. Another detective described how a trafficked woman's "customer insisted on putting bits of metal into his condom causing her injury". So why wasn't the man arrested and charged? The C4 policemen donned armour and dramatically crashed their way into brothels. But no British male was arrested. It is only by dealing with the demand side that any real progress will be made in reducing the inflow of trafficked women. The low-life, high-income foreign pimps arrested in the film have thousands ready to replace them because trafficking women is hugely profitable. One of the last acts of Tony Blair's government was to sign and ratify the Council of Europe's convention on trafficking which I campaigned for in the Commons. The Home Office originally fought the convention, as Whitehall is today trying to derail the EU directive. Later under Gordon Brown the law was changed to make men open to naming and shaming if they paid for sex with a woman who had been trafficked or coerced into working in the sex trade. It is up to the police to apply the law and to editors to stop being accomplices of sex slavery by publishing the industry's adverts. It would be good if the liberal male media establishment could rethink their denigration of campaigners against sex slave trafficking. The C4 documentary deserves loads of prizes. It was compelling television. But we need analysis, policy and police work to squeeze the demand side.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

Prety much everything about this article got right on my nerves.

Quote:

A powerful three-part Channel 4 series on sex slave trafficking promised more than it delivered.

IIRC "powerful Channel 4 series on sex slave trafficking" used to be the preserve of lonely teenagers in the days before the internet. In fact I'm pretty sure that "powerful" is more or less synonymous with "you can have a right good fwap to this one, lads!"

I'm not questioning McShane's own habits here, just pointing out that the popularity of these things is usually 30% moral indignation and 70% thinly disguised perving (see also under: misery memoirs). I may have no claim to any sort of ethical superiority, but then I never pretended to.

Quote:

With luck the C4 documentary should alert public opinion to this depressing aspect of globalisation and the new patriarchalism which obliges young women to "have sex with 10 to 15 men a day against their will" as one detective constable told the film-makers.

"Patriarchalism"? Really? Cos I'm pretty sure that patriarchalism forces them to have sex with one stranger chosen by their elders for 50 odd years.

Quote:

Shot and edited with consummate skill with a breathy linking commentary read by Helen Mirren in the style of Laurence Olivier declaiming the World at War script

Breathy declamations? There are some odd choices of vocabulary in this thing.

Quote:

, the programme eschewed analysis in favour of showing police work in close-up detail. Two small west country forces co-operated fully with C4. The officers came over as decent, good men with female officers on the margin to help arrest women pimps and their victims.

GO EQUALITY WOOOOOOOT!!!!!!1! Not only do they now let wimmin play at being policemen they even give them a turn at arresting the occasional female villain. If they can tear themselves away from their knitting for long enough, presumably.

Quote:

But a huge amount of police time and work, including a trip to Thailand for Devon and Cornwall officers, results in a meagre haul.

Lovely photos of the beach at sunset, though.

Quote:

Thanks, Helen. Actually it is British men – not genderless "individuals" – who insist on a right to put money down and insert their penises into women's bodies.

Handy hint: goes in better lengthways.

Seriously, wtf?

Quote:

Serving this demand has led to massive increase in the supply of prostituted women. There is a sterile debate over numbers which C4 sensibly ignored. Getting the figures is impossible.

Sterile because it proves you wrong, right?

Quote:

The United Nations' International Labour Organisation says there are 2.45 million women trafficked into sex slavery worldwide. The Red Cross and other global outfits also insist that millions of women are traded. The idea Britain has only a few is laughable, despite a report in the Guardian by Nick Davies claiming that sex slave trafficking was hugely exaggerated. ACPO produced a report recently which talked of 4,000 trafficked women but British NGOs who work with the victims of sex slave trafficking criticised the methodology of ACPO's work and said the figure was much higher.

Biased organisations are biased shocka.

Quote:

An organisation called the English Collective of Prostitutes, which has spokespersons but no details of membership or finances, is always available for Newsnight or the Guardian to pooh-pooh the problem of trafficking into or within Britain.

Yeah, I can't possibly think why an organisation representing sex workers might be reluctant to publish a full list of its members.

Quote:

Its solution is to legalise prostitution. Where this has been tried as in Nevada, the death and injury rate of prostituted women rises and students at universities in the US state believe it is impossible to rape a prostituted woman.

And in Japan they're way lower. Try again, moral majority.

Quote:

The C4 film avoided this debate or any effort to examine the ideology of male oppression that lies behind the extraordinary growth in sex trafficking. Detectives held up adverts in the Southampton Echo placed by one of the pimps in which "fresh" bodies were on offer for the delight of Southampton men. There was no challenge to the newspaper editors who are complicit in the sex slave industry by carrying adverts for sexual services.

Whodathoughtit? Free speech. I too thought that New Labour had successfully put an end to that sort of thing.

Quote:

It is only by dealing with the demand side that any real progress will be made in reducing the inflow of trafficked women.

Should be easy enough to eliminate entirely eliminate the nation's sex drive.

Quote:

One of the last acts of Tony Blair's government was to sign and ratify the Council of Europe's convention on trafficking which I campaigned for in the Commons. The Home Office originally fought the convention, as Whitehall is today trying to derail the EU directive.

Well yeah. Tbh it sounds kind of iffy to me too. There's a load of borderline stuff in there - extraterritorial jurisdiction, phone tapping, limitations on the rights of the accused... Okay, we've already accepted a lot of that with the EU arrest warrant, but still.

Quote:

It would be good if the liberal male media establishment could rethink their denigration of campaigners against sex slave trafficking.

Er... "An organisation called the English Collective of Prostitutes, which has spokespersons but no details of membership or finances, is always available for Newsnight or the Guardian to pooh-pooh the problem of trafficking into or within Britain."

Quote:

But we need analysis, policy and police work

So it would seem.

I'm so glad that the New Labour lot have got so much time on their hands for writing articles these days. It reminds me how grateful I am to be rid of them.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

Originally Posted by Zichao

I'm not questioning McShane's own habits here, just pointing out that the popularity of these things is usually 30% moral indignation and 70% thinly disguised perving (see also under: misery memoirs). I may have no claim to any sort of ethical superiority, but then I never pretended to.

I doubt that. I didn't see this prog, but none of the documentaries on the topic I've ever seen have had anything remotely titillating about them.

Quote:

"Patriarchalism"? Really? Cos I'm pretty sure that patriarchalism forces them to have sex with one stranger chosen by their elders for 50 odd years.

Not necessarily.

Originally Posted by contracycle

I doubt that. I didn't see this prog, but none of the documentaries on the topic I've ever seen have had anything remotely titillating about them.

I would question Z's % estimates but, in France, sex stories are always titillating. Cabu, a political comic-strip artist, made that point once, powerfully about the Yugoslav wars - A teenage girl is describing her gang rape while lots of (french) male are listening... with huge hards-on...

In any case, the OP's theory was shot to pieces by reality - Was there not a prolonged and expensive police action undertaken to uncover sex slavery that totally failed some months ago? There was a beautiful piece of TV where even the presenter crushed the then governmental envoy on the subject, pointing out the (previous) gvt total incapability of generating any overwhelming evidence of sex slavery, despite its strong desire to do so...

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

Again , I've never seen any of these address or describe the sex act as such. It was investigation into the criminal networks, not a lurid story about the lives of prostitutes.

I think sentences like "[it] obliges young women to "have sex with 10 to 15 men a day against their will" (as one detective constable told the film-makers)" are enough to fire most people imagination...

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

Basically what Gilles said.

I mean technically overfishing is a way bigger problem than the illegal sex trade, but no one's going to notice in the Radio Times that Channel 4's doing a series of programmes about fish quotas and think "ooh, better set the video for that".

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.

I still find this implausible. It's hardly as if real titillation is hard to get if thats what you want.

But the murky, dark elements of "white slavery" adds spice..

__________________
Unless otherwise specified, I am posting as a regular poster. When I will act as a mod, I'll make sure you're in no doubt.

Craigslist isn't now free of sex ? you just can't pay for it | Jennifer Abel | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

Quote:

Power corrupts. Even the high ethical standards of prostitutes would probably plunge down to near-politician levels if they wielded legal authority over their fellow citizens. Since politicos actually do, they turn the mighty power of the state not just on legitimate threats to the commonweal, but anything they find annoying or distasteful. Which is why, if you visit the Craigslist website, you'll find the links to their "adult services" section gone, replaced by the word "censored". You can't blame Craigslist for caving under pressure, not when the attorneys general of 18 different states all threatened legal action at once. Craigslist might win if it countersued on free-speech grounds, but they can't afford the long, costly legal battles such victory would require. "Adult" services, of course, is a euphemism for "sexual" services. Lawmakers hated Craigslist from the get-go because sex workers used it to advertise their services. Yet if you listen to politicians praise themselves now that the ads are gone, you won't hear much talk about banning activity between consenting adults. No, politicos prefer to invoke The Children. In a statement her office released Saturday, California congresswoman Jackie Speier blamed websites such as Craigslist for child prostitution. "We can't forget the victims, we can't rest easy. Child sex trafficking continues and lawmakers need to fight future machinations of internet-driven sites that peddle children." No argument there: forcing children into prostitution is an utterly abhorrent crime. Forcing anybody into prostitution is, and when callous sociopaths turn innocent victims into sexual slaves for their own profit, it's undeniably good when police shut down these loathsome enterprises. Yet when attorneys general started crusading against Craigslist, it wasn't kidnapping rapists they worried about, but adults who made money selling consensual services. In my own state of Connecticut, Attorney General Richard Blumenthal (now a Senate candidate) has been on the Craigslist warpath since at least 2008. That March, his office put out a press release saying: "As a small step in response to my concerns, Craigslist now requires anyone posting a listing in the erotic services section to provide a phone number. This step, however, will hardly deter the prostitution problem on the site, and may indeed make it worse. Many of the most graphic solicitations already include a telephone number to enable prospective patrons of their services to contact them." But now it's about the children. Why do so many politicos cling to the fiction that the best way to stop coerced sex acts is to criminalise consensual ones? Maybe that's an unfair question; it's not just lawmakers who claim this. Anytime you suggest legalised prostitution might be better than the dangerous, illegal status quo, opponents always raise the spectre of sexual slavery. And it's not only prostitutes whose opponents blur the line between coercion and consent; any sex-themed work inspires such dishonesty. I've faced it personally: in my university days I worked as a stripper and now, years later, occasionally wax nostalgic about it on websites like this. Without fail, whenever I write on the theme "Ich bin ein ex-go go dancer," a subset of the commentariat insists I was exploited, whether I knew it or not. Contributed to the oppression of others. And what about enslaved women forced to become strippers, huh? The protests are exponentially more heated when ex-prostitutes write to defend their trade. Too many otherwise sensible people believe sex, alone among all forms of human interaction, spawns some malignant magic whenever money changes hands. It's still perfectly legal to search for sex on Craigslist; you just can't exchange cash for it. In other news from last week, prosecutors in Maricopa County, Arizona, decided there is insufficient evidence to charge prison guards over the May 2009 death of inmate Marcia Powell, who was serving a 27-month sentence for prostitution when officials locked her in an outdoor cage under the 107-degree desert sun for four hours. She died in hospital later that evening. Guards deny allegations they refused her requests for water; witnesses say otherwise, and the autopsy shows Powell died of complications from heat exposure, and had no signs of hydration. Her corpse had a core temperature of 108 degrees, plus burns and blisters all over her body, which is not to say her captors did anything criminal. At least she wasn't selling herself on some filthy street corner or sleazy website, right? Ask anyone who supports the Craigslist crackdown: they'll tell you laws against prostitution are needed to protect women like Powell from dangerous and degrading circumstances. How would America be different if consensual prostitution were legal? On the plus side, Marcia Powell probably wouldn't have broiled to death. As a minus, she would have continued exchanging sex for money, and the Craigslist brouhaha is merely the latest anecdote showing how lawmakers utterly abhor people who do that. America is determined to knock out prostitution, and our legal system never pulls its punches.

__________________
Standard disclaimer: the disgusting statements contained in this post are the views of the poster, and unless specified do not represent the views of the moderators or the site's owners.