Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
elrond

The rush to reduce demand for prostitution

17 posts in this topic

George Bush passed into legislation an act on trafficking. One little piece from a report on the person who helped get this legislation theough.

The original bill created the Trafficking in Persons Office, an organization to monitor trafficking worldwide and to rate countries in a three-tier system based on trafficking levels and government efforts to combat the trade.

The most recent revision updates the criteria by which nations are evaluated, requiring that they show "serious and sustained efforts to reduce the demand for commercial sex." This new stipulation is intended to address nations in which prostitution is legal.

http://media.www.ramcigar.com/media/storage/paper366/news/2009/01/22/News/Professor.Triumphs.With.Sex.Trafficking.Legislation-3593220.shtml

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trafficking is evil. So is paedophilia and the forcing of girls in Africa and poor countries into prostitution through economic necessity.

However, these factors are being used as an excuse to push a puritan agenda. They can arguably be better tackled within a moderate and well-regulated environment.

The USA has a long history of puritanical attempts to close down what are seen as sinful activities -- drinking, drugs, porn, pre-marital sex, and prostitution. All of these have failed and probably will never succeed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
George Bush passed into legislation an act on trafficking. One little piece from a report on the person who helped get this legislation theough.

The original bill created the Trafficking in Persons Office, an organization to monitor trafficking worldwide and to rate countries in a three-tier system based on trafficking levels and government efforts to combat the trade.

The most recent revision updates the criteria by which nations are evaluated, requiring that they show "serious and sustained efforts to reduce the demand for commercial sex." This new stipulation is intended to address nations in which prostitution is legal.

http://media.www.ramcigar.com/media/storage/paper366/news/2009/01/22/News/Professor.Triumphs.With.Sex.Trafficking.Legislation-3593220.shtml

The most recent revision updates the criteria by which nations are evaluated, requiring that they show "serious and sustained efforts to reduce the demand for commercial sex." This new stipulation is intended to address nations in which prostitution is legal.

The bill provides for sanctions against countries that receive poor ratings. Countries scoring in the lowest tier risk losing aid in certain areas, and their officials can be denied admittance to the country

I am no quite sure I understand the full implications of this??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The most recent revision updates the criteria by which nations are evaluated, requiring that they show "serious and sustained efforts to reduce the demand for commercial sex." This new stipulation is intended to address nations in which prostitution is legal.

The bill provides for sanctions against countries that receive poor ratings. Countries scoring in the lowest tier risk losing aid in certain areas, and their officials can be denied admittance to the country

I am no quite sure I understand the full implications of this??[/QUOTE]

read this

http://www.nodo50.org/Laura_Agustin/us-anti-sex-trafficking-law-causes-police-violence-in-cambodia

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The most recent revision updates the criteria by which nations are evaluated, requiring that they show "serious and sustained efforts to reduce the demand for commercial sex." This new stipulation is intended to address nations in which prostitution is legal.

The bill provides for sanctions against countries that receive poor ratings. Countries scoring in the lowest tier risk losing aid in certain areas, and their officials can be denied admittance to the country

I am no quite sure I understand the full implications of this??[/QUOTE]

read this

http://www.nodo50.org/Laura_Agustin/us-anti-sex-trafficking-law-causes-police-violence-in-cambodia

Thanks Starman you're a star B)

The only thing is now that I know how it works, I think I am even more

confused than ever...

It appears to be the case of 'cultural imperialism' under the pretext of looking

out for the welfare of the world's public.

Well at it least this 'cultural experience' is consistent with the US aims of world dominance :):rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trafficking is evil. So is paedophilia and the forcing of girls in Africa and poor countries into prostitution through economic necessity.

However, these factors are being used as an excuse to push a puritan agenda. They can arguably be better tackled within a moderate and well-regulated environment.

The USA has a long history of puritanical attempts to close down what are seen as sinful activities -- drinking, drugs, porn, pre-marital sex, and prostitution. All of these have failed and probably will never succeed.

Exactly so, an excuse to push a puritan agenda.

Not only have these attempts failed and cannot succeed, they can be disastrously counterproductive as in the case of prohibition which enabled crime to get organised on such a scale that America now will never be rid of it. This happened because the marketplace for the sale and purchase of alcohol will always exist, criminalised or otherwise.

If the sexual marketplace, which is going to exist regardless of legislation, is fully criminalised, it is axiomatic that organised crime, with its sophistication and access to resources, will take a much bigger slice of the action and consequently trafficking will be a bigger proportion of the trade. Total demand may fall but the absolute numbers of trafficked girls will rise. A ghastly outcome. The trade will be driven further underground, the girls will be harder to find and rescue, and accurate objective information/statistics as to the scale of the trade will be even more unclear.

I've been a Labour sympathiser all my adult life but I'm truly ashamed that the Party could pass such legislation with it's implications for those poor foreign women just to pursue a puritanical man-hating agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Starman you're a star B)

The only thing is now that I know how it works, I think I am even more

confused than ever...

It appears to be the case of 'cultural imperialism' under the pretext of looking

out for the welfare of the world's public.

Well at it least this 'cultural experience' is consistent with the US aims of world dominance :):rolleyes:

I thought you had read the following articles by Ronald Weizer long time ago (well maybe you have but memory might not be so good)

here:

http://nsrc.sfsu.edu/article/prostitution_panic

http://www.bayswan.org/traffick/Weitzer_Criminologist.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been a Labour sympathiser all my adult life but I'm truly ashamed that the Party could pass such legislation with it's implications for those poor foreign women just to pursue a puritanical man-hating agenda.

I too have been a lifetime labour voter. They will never regain my support until they ditch these plans, the dishonesty involved, and those who promote them.

I am amazed that in 2009 we face such gross stupidity and do not understand how anyone who considers themselves intelligent could support such ridiculous ideas.

Jacqui Smith & Co think it acceptable to attempt to mislead about the justification for, and effects of, their proposals and hoodwink their acceptance. This to me is totally unforgivable..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sorry, my laptop was acting up just now, sorry for the double post.B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Trafficking is evil. So is paedophilia and the forcing of girls in Africa and poor countries into prostitution through economic necessity.

However, these factors are being used as an excuse to push a puritan agenda. They can arguably be better tackled within a moderate and well-regulated environment.

The USA has a long history of puritanical attempts to close down what are seen as sinful activities -- drinking, drugs, porn, pre-marital sex, and prostitution. All of these have failed and probably will never succeed.

To me, they always seem to use the bad/dark side to it in order to ban it as a whole. What we must bare in mind is that these policies have a religious agenda, I mean look at the Bush administration war on contraceptives for example, they let anti-contraceptive groups have their way in terms of condoms and the pill being banned from pharmacies and also the Bush administration stopped shipping free condoms to African countries with HIV/AIDS outbreaks in order tom please religious leaders not to mention that the lies the catholic church said (thankfully not all catholics listen to those wankers) that condoms carry HIV in order to increase their number of followers. Which proves that religious leaders don’t give a fuck about their followers as long as their religion survives into the next generation.

I too have been a lifetime labour voter. They will never regain my support until they ditch these plans, the dishonesty involved, and those who promote them.

I am amazed that in 2009 we face such gross stupidity and do not understand how anyone who considers themselves intelligent could support such ridiculous ideas.

Jacqui Smith & Co think it acceptable to attempt to mislead about the justification for, and effects of, their proposals and hoodwink their acceptance. This to me is totally unforgivable..

I never supported any party ever since I have been the legal age to vote, I think though maybe I should vote for the lib dems mostly cause unlike the labour and conservative leaders the leader of the lib dems is not religious so he won’t put any religious beliefs into his policies. I am not bad mouthing religions as a whole because you have many religious people who have liberal views towards sex and likes the things that the governments want banned. The Swedish model was adopted by a government with deep religious beliefs, Norway adopted it for that reason, the US and UK trying to adopt it too shows that the governments rather be loyal to their religious beliefs rather then the people who voted for them.

Here it may be bad now since labour are in charge but if the tories get back in it will be even worse cause they are more anti-sex then labour.B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
George Bush passed into legislation an act on trafficking. One little piece from a report on the person who helped get this legislation theough.

.

Donna Hughes a notorious nazi fem, part of the international anti brigade together with Gunilla Ekberg, Melissa Farley , Janice Raymond and a few others

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One of the tactics is to restrict aid & limit participation in some US programmes to countries that do not sign up to the moral agenda.

Brazil is a notable refusnik in this respect, in that they refuse to condemn or stigmatze prostitution & do not accept any US aid that is so qualified.

However I do note that "Help" disco club on Avenua Atlantica, Rio, is being closed in an effort to make Copacobana respectable again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good start for Obama, but prostitution is something else since he'll have to deal with radical left wing feminists also

Obama lifts ban on abortion funds

The US is one of the biggest supporters of family planning programmes globally, but former president George W Bush blocked funds for abortion services.

Vatican attacks US abortion move

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vatican attacks US abortion move

So he must be doing something right then.

'One Vatican official warned against the "arrogance" of those in power who think they can decide between life and death.'

Hmmm.. the Vatican lecturing others on arrogance. Interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Good start for Obama, but prostitution is something else since he'll have to deal with radical left wing feminists also

Hopefully the feminists that supports prositution and the ones who are pro things to do with sex in general (aka feminists who are sane who believe that both men and women are equal) will be the majority so hopefully he will listen to them. This is why I like Obama, he is a religious man who does not let his religious beliefs influence his policies cause everyone knows if a leader of a country puts his or her religious beleifs into their policies then freedom and democracy are fucked.

So he must be doing something right then.

'One Vatican official warned against the "arrogance" of those in power who think they can decide between life and death.'

Hmmm.. the Vatican lecturing others on arrogance. Interesting.

What I find strange that the Vatican has these views on abortion considering that it is the vatican that says that condoms are infected with HIV/AIDS in Africa hence why HIV/AIDS is far worse there. Proves that they don't give a fuck about people, all they care about is increasing the number of followers.:cool:

Further proof that religion is dying and more proof that all religions are getting desperate for new followers and are willing to do/ say things to try and counter that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Starman you're a star :D

The only thing is now that I know how it works, I think I am even more

confused than ever...

It appears to be the case of 'cultural imperialism' under the pretext of looking

out for the welfare of the world's public.

Well at it least this 'cultural experience' is consistent with the US aims of world dominance :D:rolleyes:

here's an interesting article dated 24 March 2009 by someone described as:

Ann Jordan is the director of the Program on Human Trafficking and Forced Labor at the Center for Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, American University Washington College of Law

Sex Trafficking: The Abolitionist Fallacy:

http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/1550/1/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

here's an interesting article dated 24 March 2009 by someone described as:

Ann Jordan is the director of the Program on Human Trafficking and Forced Labor at the Center for Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, American University Washington College of Law

Sex Trafficking: The Abolitionist Fallacy:

http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/1550/1/

The Obama administration should reject the ideology-driven policies, practices, and programs of the past eight years. Specifically, it should base all programs and policies on proven results and sound ideas derived from objective evidence. It should take into consideration the concerns and ideas of sex worker groups when developing new programs and policies. The administration should stop applying the anti-prostitution pledge in a way that prevents the funding of U.S. and foreign organizations that work with sex workers. ...

I don't think his 'Time for Change' slogan may extend this far!!

And what role has the Buddha in all of this Siddarth[a] (Kara) :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