Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Guest wellnhappy

My MP..

14 posts in this topic

Following George McCoy's effort to get all those involved in the industry to lobby their MP's I recently I had quite a discussion with my MP (Janet Dean) via Email and PM and have to say that both her and I were alarmed at the lack of knowledge that she and many others actually have with regards to the paid sex scene.

To start with it took me ages to get her to come to terms with the fact that the street scene is now a small part of the scene overall, she and her collegues obviously had little or no knowledge about the growing internet based scene and she actually told me at one point that she would have voted for HH's proposals based on her limited knowledge of the street scene and the scare stories she had heard about trafficking.

I told her I thought the proposed new laws were sexist and this is her reply:-

With regard to your view that the laws related to prostitution are sexist, I would refer you to the straegy document, which states "Male prostitution takes place mainly off-street and does not, in general, have the same issues regarding drug use or coercion and so rarely comes to the attention of the police. The UK Network of Sex Work Projects reports that the majority of men selling sex in the UK are not coerced or trafficked and do not have to pay pimps or inappropriate relationships with other other individuals who control their movements. For this reason the strategy focuses primarily on the needs of women prostitutes.

'The document ( a massive document she sent me to read through) states its fact so it must be', was my answer. The above statement really annoyed me because its far from true, so I spent some time pointing her all over the internet and pretty much begged her to make an informed decision, you can imagine just how shocked she was when she realised that the vast majority of female sexworkers do work from behind closed doors, are not pimped, are happy with their work and actually enjoy it.

Several other girls I know have also contacted their MP's and seem to have a mixed bag of responses, one thing is sticking out like a sore thumb though. Most male MP's are against the proposals while the females seem to be very much for them.

I do think I've certainly got my MP thinking differently now and would urge you all to contact yours, find out exactly where they stand and ensure the government are giving them the correct information. It would be a shame if this slipped through because our MP's are not making informed decisions.

http://www.sexlawsandmps.co.uk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Following George McCoy's effort to get all those involved in the industry to lobby their MP's I recently I had quite a discussion with my MP (Janet Dean) via Email and PM and have to say that both her and I were alarmed at the lack of knowledge that she and many others actually have with regards to the paid sex scene.

To start with it took me ages to get her to come to terms with the fact that the street scene is now a small part of the scene overall, she and her collegues obviously had little or no knowledge about the growing internet based scene and she actually told me at one point that she would have voted for HH's proposals based on her limited knowledge of the street scene and the scare stories she had heard about trafficking.

I told her I thought the proposed new laws were sexist and this is her reply:-

With regard to your view that the laws related to prostitution are sexist, I would refer you to the straegy document, which states "Male prostitution takes place mainly off-street and does not, in general, have the same issues regarding drug use or coercion and so rarely comes to the attention of the police. The UK Network of Sex Work Projects reports that the majority of men selling sex in the UK are not coerced or trafficked and do not have to pay pimps or inappropriate relationships with other other individuals who control their movements. For this reason the strategy focuses primarily on the needs of women prostitutes.

'The document ( a massive document she sent me to read through) states its fact so it must be', was my answer. The above statement really annoyed me because its far from true, so I spent some time pointing her all over the internet and pretty much begged her to make an informed decision, you can imagine just how shocked she was when she realised that the vast majority of female sexworkers do work from behind closed doors, are not pimped, are happy with their work and actually enjoy it.

Several other girls I know have also contacted their MP's and seem to have a mixed bag of responses, one thing is sticking out like a sore thumb though. Most male MP's are against the proposals while the females seem to be very much for them.

I do think I've certainly got my MP thinking differently now and would urge you all to contact yours, find out exactly where they stand and ensure the government are giving them the correct information. It would be a shame if this slipped through because our MP's are not making informed decisions.

http://www.sexlawsandmps.co.uk

Well I had no response from my MP (woman Labour MP) but I have had a response from a few of the Lords, most noticeably Lord Dear who is a retired chief constable. He was fairly instrumental in striking down the 42 day detention bill recently and has a habit of fighting the govt on legislation even though he's a Labour peer. He said he'd look into it and bear my comments in mind if and when it came to the Lords. I basically wrote to him focusing on the fact that the govt is putting this proposal forward on the back of trafficking concerns, but the proposal itself is a blunt tool that will criminalise any man who books a girl through an agency or visits a girl in a brothel. A victimless crime. I've also written yesterday to him, to tell him about Vera Baird's comments that confirm what you have said that 90% of men paying for sex will fall foul of this law. If you've managed to get your MP talking to you, then it might be an idea to send her the link below

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2008-11-06a.354.1&s=prostitution#g354.5

As you can see the law is, by the solicitor general's own admission, applicable to 90% of men. Even though only a tiny percentage of women are being harmed by prostitution. This, for me. is the most important statement we can use against these proposals. Vera Baird was desperate to point out that contrary to Fiona MacTaggart's concerns, the law can be used against almost everybody paying for sex. Make sure that comment comes back to haunt her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As you can see the law is, by the solicitor general's own admission, applicable to 90% of men. Even though only a tiny percentage of women are being harmed by prostitution.

But accruing to the anti brigade's propaganda, it is the other way around, ie that 90% or so are harmed by prostitution(eg 18 000 sex slaves). So if the MPs are so ill-informed and believe that, they will also believe that that is a good proposal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But accruing to the anti brigade's propaganda, it is the other way around, ie that 90% or so are harmed by prostitution(eg 18 000 sex slaves). So if the MPs are so ill-informed and believe that, they will also believe that that is a good proposal.

I don't think so. I really think the Vera Baird quote is a huge mistake on her part. Especially when you consider that the police opposed the original Swedish model as they didn't want all paid sex criminalised. Reducing that to 90% of paid sex doesn't seem like a huge difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't think so. I really think the Vera Baird quote is a huge mistake on her part. Especially when you consider that the police opposed the original Swedish model as they didn't want all paid sex criminalised. Reducing that to 90% of paid sex doesn't seem like a huge difference.

also 18,000 sex slaves is still only 22.5%, and Vera Baird herself is very reluctant to give any figures herself after the apology she had to make re:25000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Such a pity Alan B'Stard (and his lovely wife) is no longer an MP!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Following George McCoy's effort to get all those involved in the industry to lobby their MP's I recently I had quite a discussion with my MP (Janet Dean) via Email and PM and have to say that both her and I were alarmed at the lack of knowledge that she and many others actually have with regards to the paid sex scene.

To start with it took me ages to get her to come to terms with the fact that the street scene is now a small part of the scene overall, she and her colleagues obviously had little or no knowledge about the growing internet based scene and she actually told me at one point that she would have voted for HH's proposals based on her limited knowledge of the street scene and the scare stories she had heard about trafficking.

I told her I thought the proposed new laws were sexist and this is her reply:-

With regard to your view that the laws related to prostitution are sexist, I would refer you to the strategy document, which states "Male prostitution takes place mainly off-street and does not, in general, have the same issues regarding drug use or coercion and so rarely comes to the attention of the police. The UK Network of Sex Work Projects reports that the majority of men selling sex in the UK are not coerced or trafficked and do not have to pay pimps or inappropriate relationships with other other individuals who control their movements. For this reason the strategy focuses primarily on the needs of women prostitutes.

'The document ( a massive document she sent me to read through) states its fact so it must be', was my answer. The above statement really annoyed me because its far from true, so I spent some time pointing her all over the INTERNET and pretty much begged her to make an informed decision, you can imagine just how shocked she was when she realised that the vast majority of female sexworkers do work from behind closed doors, are not pimped, are happy with their work and actually enjoy it.

Several other girls I know have also contacted their MP's and seem to have a mixed bag of responses, one thing is sticking out like a sore thumb though. Most male MP's are against the proposals while the females seem to be very much for them.

I do think I've certainly got my MP thinking differently now and would urge you all to contact yours, find out exactly where they stand and ensure the government are giving them the correct information. It would be a shame if this slipped through because our MP's are not making informed decisions.

http://www.sexlawsandmps.co.uk

I forgot to say, well done!

In addition to "your" MP it might be a good idea to write to other MPs , eg those who have signed Diane Abbot's early day motion http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=34786&SESSION=891

Unfortunately most girls don't even know the laws are about to change or even less so the consequences, esp in the NW "no THAT will NEVER happen here, not HERE".

One would have thought that parlour owners and receptionists would have done their best to convince "their" girls to put up a fight, or at least informed them that the shit will very likely hit the fan big time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I forgot to say, well done!

In addition to "your" MP it might be a good idea to write to other MPs , eg those who have signed Diane Abbot's early day motion http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=34786&SESSION=891

Well, well. Diane Abbott! I remember her from university days. Wasn't very impressed. And nothing she had done since had done much to change this view. But at last it seems as if she is justifying her existence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I forgot to say, well done!

In addition to "your" MP it might be a good idea to write to other MPs , eg those who have signed Diane Abbot's early day motion http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=34786&SESSION=891

Unfortunately most girls don't even know the laws are about to change or even less so the consequences, esp in the NW "no THAT will NEVER happen here, not HERE".

One would have thought that parlour owners and receptionists would have done their best to convince "their" girls to put up a fight, or at least informed them that the shit will very likely hit the fan big time.

The girls I work with have a motto where there's a willy there's a way

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, well. Diane Abbott! I remember her from university days. Wasn't very impressed. And nothing she had done since had done much to change this view. But at last it seems as if she is justifying her existence.

but it is fun watching her with Portillo on a thursday night and working out if he is giving her one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Diane wants him so bad. Portilo barely has enough of the couch to sit on .... he should be our next president elect for services to man kind i say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But accruing to the anti brigade's propaganda, it is the other way around, ie that 90% or so are harmed by prostitution(eg 18 000 sex slaves). So if the MPs are so ill-informed and believe that, they will also believe that that is a good proposal.

MPs who don't have a special interest won't tend to think that way, though. If you're an MP without a special interest, you're going to think that any legislation that criminalizes a large group of people is to be avoided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

from melonfarmers:

Thanks to Phantom who wrote to his MP

Dear Mr ...,

I do wonder about you and yours, Mr ....

We're in the middle of dire economic circumstances. Thus, what is the most pressing concern for ministers of the crown? To ban prostitution.

Now sure, the claim goes that the government is only banning purchase of sex from trafficked women or such under control of pimps.

But the fact that this proposal was preceded by an attempt at an outright ban reveals where the real desire lies. Also the expression 'controlled for gain' is so ambiguous that it may allow for nigh on limitless interpretation.

No end of lawyerly mischief can be had with the definition of what constitutes 'control' or 'gain'. Solicitor general Vera Baird has only just recently confirmed that very notion by stating that she believed this would affect 90% of all prostitution.

Thus, clearly, the intent is one of eradication. So let's not beat around the bush with sophistry. Labour wishes to eliminate the oldest profession or achieve as close a result as possible to elimination.

So, where Moses failed Gordon will succeed?

The idea that the customer is supposed to psychically ascertain the status of a prostitute or else be legally culpable is ludicrous. After all, 'ignorance of a woman's circumstances will not be a defence.' So the reliance on psychic powers it is then. No doubt Uri Geller will soon be publishing book on how to stay legal in Britain.

Better yet, the suggested law only seems to apply to female prostitution. Is there a particularly pressing interest in rent boys on the Labour back benches to allow for such a specific exclusion?

I don't think there is anyone in the country who wouldn't like to see any form of violent coercion of people into prostitution dealt with. But this seems not to target behaviour already criminal under current law, but instead invents an entirely new, superfluous offence.

It's the equivalent of fighting a house fire by putting up 'no parking' signs in the street. It is not merely misguided. It is idiotic, quite literally.

The notion behind this latest prohibition clearly is some sort of moral zeal. Once again the government is quoted as wanting to 'send a message' of disapproval on said issue. You may recall it was already 'sending messages' on 'extreme' pornography, another piece of legislation driven by supposed morality, rather than rationale.

Yet, I still don't see how the public require government 'messages' regarding how they wish to conduct their sex lives.

What is it about sex and Labour, Mr ...? Are you all not getting enough? Your government seems obsessed with matters sexual, unhealthily so. For some reason it seems determined to regulate how people copulate. This does seem somewhat Freudian.

What delight is there to be had from the thought of knowing someone else punished under law to fulfil one's own feelings of sexual moral propriety? I really cannot see any. The entire concept remains utterly anachronistic - and nasty.

I know you're going to vote loyally with the government, Mr .... Let's face it. You always do. But I take solace in registering my dismay at this latest legislative farce, if only so you may not claim not to have heard a dissenting voice.

http://www.melonfarmers.co.uk/ssp4p.htm#Controlled_by_FemNazis_3537

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