MikeThePlayer

Raids in Soho and Shepherd Market

8 posts in this topic

Probably most of you are aware, but there's interesting material in the Soho walk-up thread in the requests for info section:

http://www.punternet.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11848&page=65

There are many interesting posts, but I found no.s 1603, 1647, 1655 and 1658 especially relevant to this section.

Apparently, there are raids going on in Soho and Shepherd Market, although they haven't received much coverage here yet. Any further info on this topic would be much appreciated.

The feeling I get is that the interpretation of the law is quite a bit broader than what we were expecting. We had thought that the law was about men seeing women who were working against their will, etc. Now, the coverage seems wider. Because if those women working in Soho were coerced, etc, and the police knew about this, they would surely have rescued them earlier...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Probably most of you are aware, but there's interesting material in the Soho walk-up thread in the requests for info section:

http://www.punternet.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11848&page=65

There are many interesting posts, but I found no.s 1603, 1647, 1655 and 1658 especially relevant to this section.

Apparently, there are raids going on in Soho and Shepherd Market, although they haven't received much coverage here yet. Any further info on this topic would be much appreciated.

The feeling I get is that the interpretation of the law is quite a bit broader than what we were expecting. We had thought that the law was about men seeing women who were working against their will, etc. Now, the coverage seems wider. Because if those women working in Soho were coerced, etc, and the police knew about this, they would surely have rescued them earlier...

If there have been raids in Shepherd Market that would be extremely ironical, as Natasha Gompert's drawn petition, seeking decriminalisation of sex work is presently running there, at Gallery 54. I went to be drawn and found her charming.

Soho short-time punts are not to my taste but I am very sceptical of the idea that many of these girls are forced. Only last year several of them, with the help of the local vicar fought off a very dubious attempt by the police to close their walk-ups. Moreover, there was (and probably still is) a trade association called Soho Working Girls that was involved in demonstrations againstthe present law.

http://www.prostitutescollective.net/SohoJusticePrevails.htm

http://www.prostitutescollective.net/masked_parade_of_sex_workers.htm

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23646265-soho-brothel-to-re-open-after-judge-throws-out-police-case.do

Suing and demonstrating for your right to work are not the typical actions of forced victims..... And these points should surely be made in reposes to press articles if there really has been a concerted series of raids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Apparently, there are raids going on in Soho and Shepherd Market, although they haven't received much coverage here yet.

My compliments, Sir! I cannot recall "Shepherd Market" being correctly named before!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Soho short-time punts are not to my taste but I am very sceptical of the idea that many of these girls are forced. Only last year several of them, with the help of the local vicar fought off a very dubious attempt by the police to close their walk-ups. Moreover, there was (and probably still is) a trade association called Soho Working Girls that was involved in demonstrations againstthe present law.

http://www.prostitutescollective.net/SohoJusticePrevails.htm

http://www.prostitutescollective.net/masked_parade_of_sex_workers.htm

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23646265-soho-brothel-to-re-open-after-judge-throws-out-police-case.do

Suing and demonstrating for your right to work are not the typical actions of forced victims..... And these points should surely be made in reposes to press articles if there really has been a concerted series of raids.

When the new laws were being debated members of the Select Committee visited Soho and found no evidence of coercion.

Keith Vaz in response to the usual demented ranting from D MacShane: "Of course, my right hon. Friend is well travelled around the world, so he will have made his own inquiries, but I have to tell him that when I and other members of the Select Committee went down to meet those prostitutes, they were very contented with what they were doing. Many of them were from eastern Europe, and they had come here because they wanted to earn money. Their only disappointment was that my right hon. Friend was not there with us."

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm091112/debtext/91112-0010.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The feeling I get is that the interpretation of the law is quite a bit broader than what we were expecting. We had thought that the law was about men seeing women who were working against their will, etc. Now, the coverage seems wider.

So it would seem; Det Insp Kevin Hyland said the following after the first arrests on Thursday:

"Men who visit brothels and pay for sex are exploiting vulnerable woman and plying a trade of abuse."

"The new legislation, enforceable from today, means that people who pay for sex in brothels can be arrested and appear before the courts, which we hope will act as a deterrent to others."

Nothing there about co-ercion :o

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When the new laws were being debated members of the Select Committee visited Soho and found no evidence of coercion.

Keith Vaz in response to the usual demented ranting from D MacShane:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm091112/debtext/91112-0010.htm

Here are a couple of specimens of said ranting:

"That is the whole purpose of the sex industry, however. It removes from women their womanhood and turns them into mechanical objects of sexual pleasure who accept a large number of penises every day to satisfy men's desire"

and

"I can imagine almost any profession, business or trade in the world that I would be happy for any of my three daughters to go into, or that I would have been happy for my mother, my partners and other women friends to go into. However, I really cannot accept that accepting a number of penises in one's orifices in order to gratify the pleasures of men is a profession that we should dignify as just another trade that a Select Committee of this House goes and gives an approving pat on the head to."

The poor chap really does seem to have problems. I'm quite prepared to believe that the Mr. Bloom Experience may not be the most gratifying form of human contact possible, but I don't think it's fairly described as just a penis in their orifices either.

What a low and fundamentally unimaginative view of human life he has! What can have happened to him to impoverish his humanity so much?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Probably most of you are aware, but there's interesting material in the Soho walk-up thread in the requests for info section:

http://www.punternet.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11848&page=65

There are many interesting posts, but I found no.s 1603, 1647, 1655 and 1658 especially relevant to this section.

Care to enlighten us why the fact that (1603)'Uniforms cost an extra tenner' or that (1647)'Paris was busy until 10pm' is relevant to Legalities and Legislation?

If those are not not the posts you mean perhaps you should link directly to the posts you do mean, I'm not going through 68 pages to figure it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Care to enlighten us why the fact that (1603)'Uniforms cost an extra tenner' or that (1647)'Paris was busy until 10pm' is relevant to Legalities and Legislation?

If those are not not the posts you mean perhaps you should link directly to the posts you do mean, I'm not going through 68 pages to figure it out.

Your post gave me quite a chuckle. I really needed that tonight; thank you :o!

It seems that I've mistyped the number of the first post, but the others are correct. In any case, here are the links:

http://www.punternet.com/forum/showpost.php?p=443906&postcount=1602

http://www.punternet.com/forum/showpost.php?p=447369&postcount=1647

http://www.punternet.com/forum/showpost.php?p=447521&postcount=1655

http://www.punternet.com/forum/showpost.php?p=447603&postcount=1658

BTW, from which thread have you picked up the titles that you quote? I'm intrigued!

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