Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
starman

feminists urge peers to criminalise use of prostitutes (Reuters)

10 posts in this topic

The usual dodgy statistics at the end.....71% of prostitutes attacked, 63% raped yadda yadda. Doubtless from a study of street prostitution, which is already illegal from a man's point of view, and nothing to do with prostitution as a whole.

At least they're admitting that the peers don't like strict liability and that it's going to be difficult to enforce the law; hopefully that'll cause them some issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Campaigners acknowledged that clause 13 would be difficult to enforce but hoped it would serve to deter people from using prostitutes in the first place.

And there's the true agenda coming out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At least they're admitting that the peers don't like strict liability

Very good point and while we worry on our side of the fence as it were about all this dangerous nonsense going through, it looks like the radfems and co. are worried it won't, so fingers crossed that common sense prevails over lies and radfem agendas in the Lords.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And there's the true agenda coming out.

True agenda indeed, ANY punter will do regardless of any "force deception or threats", again any journalists on here take note.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Campaigners call clause 13 in the Policing and Crime Bill "revolutionary" because it shifts the burden of criminal responsibility away from prostitutes onto people who use their services.

I wonder what that means? I must admit that I am unaware of any "criminal responsibility" that is borne by a prostitute.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just wait til there is a unbiased research that sees a lot of women paying men for sex. Would those feminist fundies complain then? Of course they won't. Why? Simple, they want to treat men how men teated women for centuries though that is thanks to religion. Not to mention that fact they are men hating, women supremacists, hate women who don't share their views bitches. They give feminists in general especially the sex positive feminists a bad name.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wonder what that means? I must admit that I am unaware of any "criminal responsibility" that is borne by a prostitute.

"What we hope with clause 13 is that we will see the traffickers in the dock and also a couple of the punters too," Catherine Briddick, Senior Legal Office at the group Rights of Women told Reuters.

Clause 13 - in fact the entire bill adds no new offences that a trafficker would be guilty of. It actually shifts criminality from the trafficker to the punter. Not from the woman, who as you say, is currently breaking no laws anyway by working in a brothel/parlour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"What we hope with clause 13 is that we will see the traffickers in the dock and also a couple of the punters too," Catherine Briddick, Senior Legal Office at the group Rights of Women told Reuters.

Despite the obvious that they will see fewer traffickers in the dock because punters will be more reluctant to report suspected cases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what that means? I must admit that I am unaware of any "criminal responsibility" that is borne by a prostitute

The 'shift' is not by way of comparing now with the proposed future, but (as part of a historical process) comparing Victorian times with the proposed future. Yes, I know they're being moronic, but morons agree with morons and there are many many morons :D

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