Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Tiggy 7

Sensible Well-balanced Article In Today's The Observer

8 posts in this topic

Well done to Shelly Stoops who echoed what Pia Jacobsen said about Sweden's hypocritical system. In a society that claims to be pro women's rights it should not only be protecting a woman's right to say no, it should also be protecting a woman's right to say yes. Getting the balance wrong and just protecting a woman's right to say no drives the sex trade undeground such as in Pia Jacobsen's experience of Sweden where women are vulnerable and have little protection against bad employers and bad punters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.guardian....crime-sex-trade

'So far, so good', both for the Coalition and for the Guardian newspapers.

The article sounds balanced, but it brought in comment from Roger Mattews who is an abolitionist and has been interviewed by Bridel in the past. I therefore put it to you that this is actually a very negative article written in a way to sound balanced.

For some this would cut off the supply of punters and force prostitutes  out of a job. "We need to get women out of a sex trade where violence is  a daily part of their life," said Roger Matthews, a criminologist at  South Bank University, London. "Many Labour politicians understood this  and we would've seen [b]Swedish law coming to Britain in two years had they  won the election[/b]."

Also the way Scotland is mentioned seems to make it a forgone conclusion that the sex industry is the be aboloshed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article sounds balanced, but it brought in comment from Roger Mattews who is an abolitionist and has been interviewed by Bridel in the past. I therefore put it to you that this is actually a very negative article written in a way to sound balanced.

For some this would cut off the supply of punters and force prostitutes  out of a job. "We need to get women out of a sex trade where violence is  a daily part of their life," said Roger Matthews, a criminologist at  South Bank University, London. "Many Labour politicians understood this  and we would've seen [b]Swedish law coming to Britain in two years had they  won the election[/b]."

Also the way Scotland is mentioned seems to make it a forgone conclusion that the sex industry is the be aboloshed.

I wonder how many of the readers will be as knowledgeable and perceptive as you are, or am I merely a naif? In any case, at least 'the opposition' appears to be less strident. :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how many of the readers will be as knowledgeable and perceptive as you are, or am I merely a naif? In any case, at least 'the opposition' appears to be less strident. :o

I am a cynic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a cynic

I'm working up to it, but I've slowed down a bit since Harriet and the Harridens were yanked off the stage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a cynic

Maybe, and you may be right about Matthews, Elrond, but I do think you’re putting an overly Machiavellian slant onto the tone of the article!

However, my real criticism of the article is that this somewhat dubious figure of 80,000 prostitutes is trawled out yet again and, even if you accept it, it represents all prostitution in the country (street, brothels, independents), but whilst not specifically saying so, I think it is implicit in the article (to the average reader at least) that most of these are on the streets.

Oh – and why, once again, do they insist in always accompanying these kind of articles with a stock photo of a scantily clad woman (bare midriff in this case) poking her head through the door of a car in a dimly lit street! :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article sounds balanced, but it brought in comment from Roger Mattews who is an abolitionist and has been interviewed by Bridel in the past. I therefore put it to you that this is actually a very negative article written in a way to sound balanced.

For some this would cut off the supply of punters and force prostitutes  out of a job. "We need to get women out of a sex trade where violence is  a daily part of their life," said Roger Matthews, a criminologist at  South Bank University, London. "Many Labour politicians understood this  and we would've seen [b]Swedish law coming to Britain in two years had they  won the election[/b]."

Also the way Scotland is mentioned seems to make it a forgone conclusion that the sex industry is the be aboloshed.

Balanced in some areas but I think the dogma from Matthews was a little out of sync with the intent of the article. "many" politicians is just a smidge of an exaggeration. And two years? don't make me laugh.

For the record JS and HH wanted it a few years back, knew it would never get through without a victim, and so proposed "paying a person controlled for gain", only to see that knocked back because MPs realised it effectively meant any woman working in any agency or brothel or parlour, and still wouldn't require a woman to be a victim. So we were left with "forced etc."

How would it change in two years so that the Swedish model (all paid sex illegal) would pass? explain please, Mr Matthews!!

Edited by punter992005

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0