vicegirl

BBC Radio 5 live this morning

21 posts in this topic

Phoned in and kicked off, they eventually let me on live after I promised to be good, had to tone it down a bit. This government needs to stop being bloody hypocrites, yes street prostitution should be dealt with, the girls on the streets are mostly drug addicts and in danger but why tar us all with the same brush? Bringing in this stupid law will most definately drive the whole business underground. They need to deal with the trafficked girls at the bloody border not use us as scapegoats. I pay my tax and so do the girls I work with. Inland Revenue, biggest hypocrite of them all. This business needs to be legalised, it would probably do wonders for the so called credit crunch. I run a parlour, what will I do if this law was passed??, I will ride the storm. Nothing in this universe will stop a man from buying sex, he will always find a way to buy it and we will always find away to sell it. As for controlling I've already been done twice for it so it's nothing new for me, only this time I will stand up in court, 'Yes your honour I am guilty of controlling 6 women who are not drug addicts and are not forced into the proffesion. And I would like to add they all pay their taxes and so do I, every penny your honour, by the way don't be late for your 3pm appointment.' The police have better things to do than try to enforce this stupidity, like dealing with the scum who tortured baby P. and dealing with horrific knife and gun crime thats rife in the UK. One last word, just picked up the Leicester Mercury, the police raided a farm in Market Harborough where 60 men and women from EE countries were picking leeks. Seven men and one woman were arrested on suspicion of people trafficking. It's the trafficked girls that are the problem in our profession not the profession itself, the MPs concerned are just ignorant, up there own arse and dont give a damn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder wonderful comment.

May i paraphrase part of that for Radio?..........

L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As for controlling I've already been done twice for it so it's nothing new for me,

Are you saying that you have been charged and tried twice under Section 53 (Controlling prostitution for gain) of The Sexual Offences Act 2003?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you saying that you have been charged and tried twice under Section 53 (Controlling prostitution for gain) of The Sexual Offences Act 2003?

I was charged in 1986 with controlling 10 prostitutes, a hundred and fifty pound fine. Then again in 1994 I was hauled up in court charged with controlling 18 prostitutes in 12 different flats this was dropped when they finally realised it wasn't me running the flats. They keep making new laws with new wording, at the end of the day the police can close any brothel down in 24 hours if they want to very easliy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was charged in 1986 with controlling 10 prostitutes, a hundred and fifty pound fine. Then again in 1994 I was hauled up in court charged with controlling 18 prostitutes in 12 different flats this was dropped when they finally realised it wasn't me running the flats. They keep making new laws with new wording, at the end of the day the police can close any brothel down in 24 hours if they want to very easliy.

Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wonder wonderful comment.

May i paraphrase part of that for Radio?..........

L

LOL yes you can, you can also plug my novel out soon A Slice of Vice. I was invited onto a BBC show a few months ago then turned away at the last minute because Vernon Croaker was on. I told the producer I don't mind it was about time I saw a MP with his clothes on !! He laughed but still wouldn't let me on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LOL yes you can, you can also plug my novel out soon A Slice of Vice. I was invited onto a BBC show a few months ago then turned away at the last minute because Vernon Croaker was on. I told the producer I don't mind it was about time I saw a MP with his clothes on !! He laughed but still wouldn't let me on.

Sorry VG, but i will be plugging my memoir: Body Worship (True Stories of a Sex Goddess) instead!!!

L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry VG, but i will be plugging my memoir: Body Worship (True Stories of a Sex Goddess) instead!!!

L

Well you could also ask why punters are more "responsible" for our actions when paying trafficked girls than those who pay to have sex with 13 year olds and those who actually traffick the girls. Both of those offences require the person accused to be AWARE of what they're doing. If the 13yr old has a fake passport showing she's 18 then the prosecution have a lot of work to do. They need to prove he knew or at least thought it likely she was lying. If the trafficker (person who arranges visa or flight for example) argues he didn't know the girl would be working for an escort agency then the prosecution have to prove otherwise.

The govt are asking me to be more careful about paying trafficked girls than underage girls. More careful about what I'm doing than the traffickers themselves. Under theses proposals I cannot say "I thought she was working happily".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hear, hear vice girl, you voice much sense. with the current plethora of tv channels, it's only a matter of time until you grace our screens.

my understanding is that the proposed legislation is for england & wales, won't extend to us here in scotland. but, who knows what the future may bring? my hope is that common sense will win out, but how long may that take? however, even home sec jacquie smith concedes that most folk don't want to [further?] criminalise the commercial sex scene. i totally agree it's high time wg's were formally invited into society - of which they are after all an [essential?] part. surely that would increase safety for all, esp wg's, decrease the criminal element. who would suffer? criminals & hypocrites when the latter are shown up for the aerosols they most surely are. i could go on, & probably have...

see you on the barricades!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sorry VG, but i will be plugging my memoir: Body Worship (True Stories of a Sex Goddess) instead!!!

L

LOL is is out now I would like to read it! I have to take my hat off to anyone who has wrote a book. whatever the subject, its bloody hard work. Good Luck XX

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hear, hear vice girl, you voice much sense. with the current plethora of tv channels, it's only a matter of time until you grace our screens.

my understanding is that the proposed legislation is for england & wales, won't extend to us here in scotland. but, who knows what the future may bring? my hope is that common sense will win out, but how long may that take? however, even home sec jacquie smith concedes that most folk don't want to [further?] criminalise the commercial sex scene. i totally agree it's high time wg's were formally invited into society - of which they are after all an [essential?] part. surely that would increase safety for all, esp wg's, decrease the criminal element. who would suffer? criminals & hypocrites when the latter are shown up for the aerosols they most surely are. i could go on, & probably have...

see you on the barricades!

You have your problems in Scotland also. There is a band crusading to totally criminalise the sale of sex, and there is a possibility this might be proposed in an amendment to some existing legislation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LOL is is out now I would like to read it! I have to take my hat off to anyone who has wrote a book. whatever the subject, its bloody hard work. Good Luck XX

Tell you what VG, you show me yours and i'll show you mine.........

L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's the trafficked girls that are the problem in our profession not the profession itself.

Do you know that that's not true? (if you mean by "trafficked", as it sounds from context, people who are here illegally and have paid money to the people who helped them get here)

If so, you should be ashamed of yourself for trying to dump your problems on people with less power and wealth than yourself. The fact that it sounds plausible to most of the general public makes it much worse.

If not, you should think about what you said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont mind the stated intention of this bill/act - but typically it is the unstated agenda that gets my goat. vicegirl is absolutely right that the business of stopping illegals is a border issue - it cannot be the business of the punter to act on their behalf.

this will almost certainly get through as a regulation because any MP who stands up to object will come under huge scrutiny about his private life and who would want that. don't blame the MPs - it isnt their fault - it is the minister and some pressure groups causing this.

it will be used by the police to get at parlours and will be tested in court by some poor unfortunate punter who will get dragged through the filth by the system and I would not be surprised if he gets a not guilty - but at what a cost to his personal life.

these sorts of laws or regulations are more often used for purposes for which they were not intended - look at the geriatric heckler at that labour party conference a few years ago - he was the first to be arrested under the new powers of the anti-terror regulations! that is exactly what will happen here.

the only people who can expose this for what it is are some very brave wgs who have the balls (!) to get on telly and the radio and tell the public that this will have an effect but not the intended one and vicegirl is spot on with her criticism - i recommend she approach the media - trisha, that twat whos name i forget who does a crap sort of jerry springer, or gets on the brekky telly and tells it as it is.

go for it girl

having said all this, i would hate to think i had ever had sex with someone who was coerced and anything that stops that is welcome, but i dont think this is it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
... it was about time I saw a MP with his clothes on !!

Great Quote.

And Good luck with plugging the book - both of you!

I'm sure there will be other shows were they let you on instead - You are likely to draw quite a viewing, given the timing and the topic (did you know this was coming exactly Now?).

You could even post an "appearances agenda" (as I'm sure BBWorship does too)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
One last word, just picked up the Leicester Mercury, the police raided a farm in Market Harborough where 60 men and women from EE countries were picking leeks. Seven men and one woman were arrested on suspicion of people trafficking

They should make it an offence for people to buy leeks if they've been picked by trafficked workers. It will be no defence to claim that you didn't know that the leeks you bought weren't picked by legal workers. It's only by tackling the demand for root vegetables that we're going to rid ourselves of this scourge - the people that buy these vegetables need to be sent a message that it is wrong!

:eek:

PS same goes for Cockles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as some of you have indicated, why should it be upto punters to do the job of others? e.g. police, border control etc. it's not upto punters or wg's to enforce the law. however, wg's & punters are easy targets, plus it's enforcement on the cheap.

surely in a sense it's upto all of us to implement enacted legislation? esp where it concerns basics such as right of association, freeedom, etc. am sure few of us if any, would countenance trafficking, certainly in this forum.

i thought the girl interviewed on bbc y'day from the english collective was very brave in speaking up, let alone appear on tv. she spoke a lot of sense. most of the wg's with whom i've associated are not into drugs, booze etc. most work for dosh, indeed many actually like the work, can see themselves doing little else. i like to chat, before, a little during, mostly after. have always avoided drugs in my own life, not my thing. but it's not upto me to impose my values on others. there but for the grace of god...

elrond is correct. there are a number of dangerous iffy characters in scotland, full of sickening rectitude, intent on imposing their narrow, simply wrong code on the rest of us.

call me naive & foolish, but my faith in human nature, and how society has so radically changed, leads to me to believe that in the long run, this will work out for the best. all we have do to is be patient. a little campaigining would do no harm. in additon to the girl from ecp, anyone else bold & brave enough to take that on? we are stronger & more influential than we think. at the end of the day, we are trying to improve things for everyone, not just in the commercial sex scene.

again, sorry this has ended up lengthy, but not very good at brevity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you know that that's not true? (if you mean by "trafficked", as it sounds from context, people who are here illegally and have paid money to the people who helped them get here)

If so, you should be ashamed of yourself for trying to dump your problems on people with less power and wealth than yourself. The fact that it sounds plausible to most of the general public makes it much worse.

If not, you should think about what you said.

You're an idiot. She doesn't mean that the girls themselves are the problem as in "they are to blame". She means that "trafficking is a problem". Also Trafficked simply means a person brought in illegally eg without visa or people brought in for an illegal purpose eg. to work in a brothel. If they paid money to someone to help them come here to work in McDonalds it's not trafficking, but if they do the same to come work for an escort agency they're trafficked. Neither is a "victim". They COULD be brought here to be enslaved. But that's just one possible "illegal reason" not the MEANING of trafficking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you know that that's not true? (if you mean by "trafficked", as it sounds from context, people who are here illegally and have paid money to the people who helped them get here)

If so, you should be ashamed of yourself for trying to dump your problems on people with less power and wealth than yourself. The fact that it sounds plausible to most of the general public makes it much worse.

If not, you should think about what you said.

I think what VG is saying is that the government is using prostitution as a scapegoat when there is other industries that exploit trafficked people. I and many others I'm sure will agree trafficking for any reason, slave labour or prostitution should be dealt with at the borders. The government are just passing the buck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
She doesn't mean that the girls themselves are the problem as in "they are to blame". She means that "trafficking is a problem".

Hence, she dumps her problem on girls who are here illegally and have paid money to the people who helped them get here. They get to lose their livelihood so that she keeps more of hers. That's morally indefensible. Trafficking, in that sense of the word, is not a serious problem. Some cases of trafficking in that sense of the word are very serious, but the reason they're very serious is not that they involve trafficking.

Again, that's assuming that's the sense of "trafficking" she had in mind, which is anybody's guess.

Also Trafficked simply means a person brought in illegally eg without visa or people brought in for an illegal purpose eg. to work in a brothel.

Oh, is that what it means? I'd been waiting for many months to learn the answer, and now you've enlightened me.

They COULD be brought here to be enslaved. But that's just one possible "illegal reason" not the MEANING of trafficking.

You are confused about the meaning of "meaning". You have confused it with "legal definition", or some similar concept.

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