For men who pay for sex with trafficked women, ignorance is no longer a defence

[Robbien]

Source: The Guardian

Under proposals to be published today by the home secretary, Jacqui Smith, a man who "knowingly" pays for sex with a woman who has been trafficked or is under the control of a pimp could face a charge of rape, which carries a potential life sentence.

The new offence of paying for sex with somebody who is "controlled for another person's gain" is to carry a hefty fine and a criminal record.

The decision to criminalise men who pay for sex with trafficked women is likely to have a widespread impact. The Metropolitan police have estimated that 70% of the 88,000 women involved in prostitution in England and Wales are under the control of traffickers.

. . .


Harman has described the flow of women brought into Britain by human traffickers as "a modern slave trade", and said that it only exists because men are prepared to buy sex: "So to protect women we must stop men buying sex from the victims of human trafficking."

The home secretary has made clear that under the new offence it will not be enough for a man to say "I didn't know". The new offence will include a "strict liability" test so that police will only have to prove that the man paid for sex, and that the woman had been trafficked. There will be no need to prove he knew it at the time.



Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/nov/19/prostitution-law-trafficked-women-smith

[supernova]

1. You should have heard the guy on Newshour

this morning. They interviewed a woman who is supportive of the bill and a "john," who swore up and down that the women he used in Australia were their own free agents and not being used by a pimp or other dire circumstances.

Listening to his denial was truly painful

edit: link ww.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/news/ click UK Sex Laws to listen.

[John Q. Citizen]

2. Or they could legalize and regulate prostitution and eliminate the trafficking problem that way.

[Robbien]

4. They already tried to go that way and passed a bill. No 10 Downing vetoed it.

So this is Plan B.

[muriel_volestrangler]

24. Huh? "No 10 Downing" cannot veto anything in Britain

If a bill was passed (I presume you mean by the House of Commons), then it's the House of Lords (or, theoretically, the monarch, though that hasn't happened for about 300 years) that can veto it. The House of Lords 'veto' can be overridden by the Commons, given time (which basically needs enough time for an election to happen, so it would be something the populace isn't too worried about passing).

[Robbien]

37. The article mentioned the making prostitution legal was blocked by Downing Street

Re-reading it, the article does say it was proposed and then blocked by Downing.

So it wasn't actually a law, just a proposed law. I expect Downing Street can block proposals?

[muriel_volestrangler]

45. Ah yes, it can block proposals

The Prime Minister tells the party what to do - so the Home Secretary would never have actually sent a bill to Parliament if the PM had told him not to. There are ways of introducing 'private member's bills' (one or two 'private conscience' bills, like legalising abortion, or abolishing the death penalty, have been done this way), but the government can filibuster even those, if it really wants to. Nearly all legislation that gets passed in Parliament comes from the government, with the PMs OK, and the government decides how much time is allocated to its debate.

[noamnety]

8. Sorry, that doesn't work.

Trafficking increases, not decreases, when it's legalized. (Stronger customer base, easier to hide trafficking among "legitimate" businesses.)

[John Q. Citizen]

14. By that argument, slavery increses when employment is legal.

Where do you get your data from to support your contention?

[amdezurik]

30. data? that was not data that was someones

stick up the ass opinion.

[noamnety]

33. Links are in post 29 below.

It's not a theoretical argument on my part, it's just saying when X has happened, Y has been the observed/documented result.

[SteveM]

19. Do you have any supporting evidence? Thanks (nt)

[noamnety]

29. no problem.

"Prostitution and related activities--including pimping and patronizing or maintaining brothels--encourage the growth of modern-day slavery by providing a façade behind which traffickers for sexual exploitation operate. Where prostitution is tolerated, there is a greater demand for human trafficking victims and nearly always an increase in the number of women and children trafficked into commercial sex slavery."

http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2007/82809.htm

The places known for having legalized prostitution have become centralized hubs for human trafficking:

"The Netherlands is a source, transit, and destination country for men, women, and children trafficked for the purposes of commercial sexual exploitation and forced labor. Within the Netherlands, victims are often trafficked by so called “lover boys”—men who seduce young women and girls and coerce them into prostitution. Women and girls are trafficked to the Netherlands from Nigeria, Bulgaria, China, Sierra Leone, and Romania, as well as other countries in Eastern Europe, for sexual exploitation and, to a lesser extent, forced labor. " http://gvnet.com/humantrafficking/Netherlands.htm

[amdezurik]

32. A) that was about forced labor not simply sex trafficing

B) the conclusion was NOT that legalizing it made it happen more, but GAPS IN ENFORCEMENT allowed it to continue.

C) all sex is not rape

D) skimming is not your friend...

[noamnety]

34. Requoting:

"Where prostitution is tolerated, there is a greater demand for human trafficking victims and nearly always an increase in the number of women and children trafficked into commercial sex slavery."

It's pretty straight forward. You may not like that observation, it may not fit your agenda, but it is what it is.

[John Q. Citizen]

36. How about where prostitution is legal, regulated, inspected, and taxed?

As opposed to "tolerated." They are not the same thing.

Making all prostitution illegal fosters abuses especially when enforcement is lax and the trade is tolerated. Then when a woman or child complains about it they are arrested. This helps pimps enforce their hold on these victims.

Making non-exploitive prostitution illegal makes it far more lucrative and brings in more traffickers.

I do have an agenda by the way.

I'm in favor of stopping exploitation. I believe regulation works far better to stop exploitation than does prohibition. Prohibition ultimately ends up punishing the victims of exploitation and is far more lucrative for those engaging in the exploitation of other people. i think public policy which rewards exploiters financially is wrong headed.

[noamnety]

38. Do you mind if I ask

for your supporting evidence?

[John Q. Citizen]

50. Sure, here you go. Lots of research and writings. Scroll down the page for many articles

[SteveM]

35. Thanks for your reply. I have a problem with this citation...

The statement "Where prostitution is tolerated..." is not the equivalent of legalization and regulation. In my city, most of the police tolerate folks taking a toke where it isn't obvious. This does not end the expense, exploitation, prisons and death associated with drug trafficking and its enabling social paradigm: prohibition. Similarly, toleration of prostitution within a scheme of prohibition does not get at the abuses of human trafficking.

What we need is a regulatory scheme which will reduce the exploitation and expense of the present scheme of prohibition. I don't pretend that such a scheme of regulation (which is, in the end, what legalization implies) will be perfect. But it sure beats the alternative of powerful smuggling rings now operating with virtual impunity and almost complete comfort inside our prohibitionist culture.

Jailing a bunch of nitwit Johns is a variation on the powdered/crack cocaine sentencing abuses.

BTW, there is something called "John Watch," operated by the Progunprogressive.com, whereby license plates and cars are recorded and posted on the Internet, much to the chagrin of johns. The effort is designed to rid a local neighborhood and its schools and parks of the ill effects of wide-open procurement and drug distribution. It has had some good effect in this one locality. The man behind this effort favors drug/prostitution legalization, as far as I can determine. He has also (after great effort) acquired a concealed weapon to better protect him from threats due to his activities. You may also find a link to sites wherein whore mongers trade advice on who to next screw; her "qualities," cost, cleanliness, etc.

http://baltimorejohnwatch.blogspot.com/2008/10/do-something-about-it.html

[entanglement]

81. Exactly - exhibit A: Germany during the Soccer "World" Cup when many women

(mainly from Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia) were trafficked in to meet the "demand" of the soccer fans. Many were victims of kidnapping and forced or tricked into prostitution. Their situation was not helped by the unfriendly German authorities, intimidation by pimps, language barriers and uncertain immigration status.

The existence of this worldwide "industry" is a shame and a disgrace to humanity.

[Dorian Gray]

68. Lots of women

are trafficked in Amsterdam, still. Legalization didn't stop that from going on.

http://www.humantrafficking.org/updates/643

[Eric J in MN]

3. Locking men in prison for life for sex with a prostitute.

Bad idea.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

5. Yep. Punishist hysteria. Again.

[BeliQueen]

7. Why? Why is it a "bad idea"?

If it's against the law--why shouldn't they be punished for breaking the law?

Since human trafficking isn't a victimless crime, and the supply is only there because of the demand, why not attack the problem on both fronts?

[Lordquinton]

11. Because the demand isn't going anywhere

No matter what people try, there will always be those out there who want to pay for it up front. It's like how badly prohibition failed, they outlawed it, so only outlaws had it. If it's legalized and regulated, then less innocent people are prosecuted, and more time and resources are there for catching the real bad guys. Also this way, they're making a big show of punishing the end users, while the people responsible get off scott free to traffic more human lives.

[Eric J in MN]

12. They have no way of knowing if a prostitute is forced into the job.

They shouldn't be punished as if they did.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

17. False dichotomy.

What we're saying is that the punishment is EXCESSIVE.

[pattmarty]

25. All that has to be done to get around the law is to have.......

........the prostitutes sell themselves instead of a agent/pimp. Why in the fucking do you think it's called the worlds oldest profession??? Legalize it and regulate it, AND tax it, end of story. You can do exactly the same for marijuana and some "soft" drugs and with the tax receipts you can pay for single payer healthcare. I'm glad I could fix at least 3 of the US problems today.

[XemaSab]

43. Punishing johns is not the problem

Punishing them with a charge of RAPE (which carries a potential life sentence) is the problem.

Here's a scenario: Your son goes to a bachelor party. At the party is a 20-year-old woman who is officially there as a stripper, but she lets it be known to the men there that she's willing to perform sexual favors for money. This woman, unbeknownst to your son, is a sex slave from Thailand. Nobody at the party knows this. Your son has had about 6 shots, his judgement is impaired, the woman is cute, and he's got the money, so he has sex with her. Your son is later discovered to have paid for her services. He's charged with rape, convicted, and sentenced to 5 years in prison. After he gets out of prison, he can't get a job because he has a record. He's also on the local sex offender registry, so all the neighbors want nothing to do with him. Every girl he dates looks him up on the sex offender registry, and when they find out he's a rapist, they dump him, and when he tries to explain what happened they think he's lying and a creep.

All your son did was have what he thought was consensual sex with a prostitute, but his life is totally ruined.

Does your son deserve a misdemeanor charge, with 200 hours of community service? Maybe. But a rape charge? No.

[MattBaggins]

71. Bring your sons up better.

[noamnety]

72. You know the odd thing about that post?

the sympathy is with the guy - with one of the reasons cited being that he might get dumped.

Note the complete lack of expressed sympathy for the trafficked woman who, in fact, was raped by the guy, and will likely spend a lifetime being raped by other guys.

[MattBaggins]

73. Try that story another way

Here's a scenario: Your son goes to a frat party. At the party is a 14-year-old girl who lets it be known to the men there that she's willing to perform sexual favors for money. This girl, unbeknownst to your son, is a 14 years old. Nobody at the party knows this. Your son has had about 6 shots, his judgement is impaired, the girl is cute, and he's got the money, so he has sex with her. Your son is later discovered to have sex with a minor. He's charged with rape, convicted, and sentenced to 5 years in prison. After he gets out of prison, he can't get a job because he has a record. He's also on the local sex offender registry, so all the neighbors want nothing to do with him. Every girl he dates looks him up on the sex offender registry, and when they find out he's a rapist, they dump him, and when he tries to explain what happened they think he's lying and a creep.

All your son did was have what he thought was consensual sex with a minor, but his life is totally ruined.

Does your son deserve a misdemeanor charge, with 200 hours of community service? NO.

But a rape charge? YES.

[kiva]

77. Confused by your story.

In the first paragraph you indicate that "This girl, unbeknownst to your son, is a 14 years old", but then you say "All your son did was have what he thought was consensual sex with a minor". So are you saying he did or did not know that he was engaging in sex with a minor? Makes a big difference in what he "deserves" as punishment.

[LisaL]

55. Maybe I am wrong, but don't many prostitutes have pimps?

Even the ones who are not trafficked? Seems like that sort of bill would lead to many men possibly facing life in prison for having sex with prostitutes?

[muriel_volestrangler]

26. That's for when they *know* the woman was trafficked

and in that case, saying that it is, in fact, rape does make some sense. If they paid and didn't know she was trafficked, then they will be liable for a "hefty fine and criminal record".

[FedUpWithIt All]

63. I think prostitution should be legalized and regulated BUT...

This is what i posted further downthread....

I think it should be combined with something like the proposal mentioned in the OP. Legalization should carry a type of licensing. Going to someone who does not carry a license should carry severe penalties. In any legal system there is a cheaper, more violent underbelly. It happens with everything. Everything from drugs, tvs, cars and humans. Legalization is NOT always a complete answer. We cannot afford human trafficking to continue. People who traffic woman and children would be doing so outside the law. Anyone who would frequent the woman and children forced to work outside their will WOULD BE committing a form of rape and should be prosecuted.

The appeal for licensing would be obvious to women. In a regulated and licensed system, women would most likely get better pay, better health care and face less violence. Customers would be deterred by the stiffer penalties of going outside of legal would be more likely to seek out the (sometimes more costly and safe)regulated women.

Of course there would still be those SEEKING children which a legal system would not support..they SHOULD get a rape charge. A legalized system taking all the legitimate prostitution off the streets would simply make them easier to catch.

[Dogmudgeon]

6. Life imprisonment for paying for sex?

You mean that they want to ban Marriage?

:spank:

--p!
Wait a minute ... this would make it compulsory.

[MsLeopard]

9. If these women are sex slaves

then I think it's more like paying for rape. That should be a crime, IMHO. :shrug:

[Eric J in MN]

13. The point of the article is that they want to treat Johns who don't know...

...that the woman is forced into it as if they did know.

[muriel_volestrangler]

27. No - read it carefully

at the end:

Key facts

· Men to be prosecuted if they pay for sex with women who are trafficked or under control of a pimp

· Ignorance that woman was being controlled not to be a defence and conviction to carry hefty fine and criminal record

· Men who knowingly pay for sex with trafficked women may face rape charges

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

80. OK, but they still differentiate between a person hiring a prostitute who isn't a slave

and one unknowingly hiring one who is. I don't think that's correct.

[leftyladyfrommo]

42. I agree with you. We had a bunch of "message" parlors here in

the Kansas City area that had oriental women working in them. It was prostitution and the women were all sex slaves - women brought in from the Orient with promises of a better life in this country. It really was horrible.

Most women who are prostitutes really are sex slaves in one way or another. Young women hooked on drugs who live really awful lives.

You can try to paint it with a different brush but it always comes out the same. They are slaves.

[sarcasmo]

75. I wonder what kind of message they were getting?

[UNCLE_Rico]

10. File this under the category of ...

"Well intentioned, but utterly impractical, and destined to blow up spectacularly in their faces" lawmaking at it's finest.

Wait 'til the cops start putting narcs out on the street who tell the johns 'i was brought here from former yugoslavia' and then try to slap him with life (and the part they *really* want, some ludicrous fine) just for 'soliciting' her ...

Talk about going after the low-hanging fruit. How about they try catching THE TRAFFICKERS, and slapping THEM with LIFE? Now, that would make some sense, and there are few enough of them that it won't clog the courts and prison systems with an absurd number of cases/inmates ...

[nyc 4 Biden]

16. "How about they try catching THE TRAFFICKERS"

That's the ticket. They need to get at the root of the problem. Sure, arresting Johns is a fine idea( although I think putting their names in the paper is even more effective), but I doubt that will affect the demand much. Solely attacking the demand side will only lead to Johns finding new ways to evade being caught.

[closeupready]

40. yup. If there are 88,000 such women, this will mean putting away tens of thousands of men for life.

And then they point and laugh at the AMERICAN justice system. I'm sorry, this just does not compute.

[muriel_volestrangler]

47. Again, I'm not sure if you've understood the story

the charge of rape will only apply if the man knows the prostitute was trafficked - so that he knows she's having sex against her will, effectively, and saying that it is rape is therefore justifiable.

[closeupready]

48. Okay, but I'm still not sure I understand.

If we are talking about underage prostitutes, that's one thing.

But if these are adult women, I don't understand how that can be considered sex against her will. It is morally reprehensible to engage in sexual relations with women who are working under those circumstances. But what about the pimps? What are the penalties for being a trafficker? Do they also get life terms? What kinds of law enforcement operations are conducted to actually stop this sex trafficking?

[muriel_volestrangler]

49. They are adult, but they are being held against their will

they have been tricked (perhaps they were told they could get a real job in Britain) into a position where they may have had their passport taken, they are threatened with violence, their families back where they came from may be threatened with violence, and they're told they can't go to the authorities, because they're in the country illegally. They may be physically locked up as well.

[LisaL]

59. Trafficked or under control of a "pimp."

Don't many prostitutes have pimps even if they aren't trafficked?

[muriel_volestrangler]

65. The quoted sentence at the start of the excerpt implies either, but ...

... the list at the end of the article seems to say the rape charge is only for sex with women known to have been trafficked. And that seems to match with other news reports, eg:

those who pay a prostitute knowing she has been forcibly trafficked could face rape charges

the plan would make it a criminal offense to pay for sex with a prostitute "controlled for another person's gain" and could bring rape charges against men who knowingly paid for sex with a woman forced to work as a prostitute (though "forced to work" might conceivably include women threatened with violence if they stop, even if they are from Britain, I guess)

It will become an offence to buy sex from anyone "controlled for another person's gain". Only women who work for themselves will not be covered, and men who knowingly use a prostitute who has been trafficked could be prosecuted for rape

[zazen]

15. the guy on NPR thinks that his needs for "emotional comfort" trump the need to save sex slaves

I wonder if he's ever considered seeing a therapist for those needs rather than buying human flesh from "happy girls." Is he that deluded that he actually thinks they're "happy" having sex with him and "having fun?" Even those women--the ones presumably making a career of prostitution in Australia apparently because it's safe and fulfilling-- are just pretending with his fat ass so they'll get a better tip.

You know, I think if you buy a gun and it was stolen, or you buy a second hand radio and it was stolen, that you have some legal culpability, even if you didn't know it was stolen in the first place. I believe this has been at least in the area of electronics to put a damper on the black market. But apparently, if you're buying the body of another human being and it turns out that they've been coerced into having sex with you, you're just an innocent victim who couldn't possibly tell that the woman/child was coerced (or that the 18-year-old was really 13.) I mean, don't humans give off better signals than radios? How could you NOT know? Do they have the empathic capacity of reptiles?

But of course they don't know--they never WANT to know-- because the entire EXPERIENCE is about IGNORING THE "SEX WORKERS" HUMANITY. If the johns actually paid attention to the prostitute's real emotional cues insteading of projecting their pornography-generated fantasies onto them, they might not be able to get it up, and that's the tragedy this jerk wants to avoid at all costs. It's all about protecting his erection.

If only they'd apply this law to using, buying, and distributing pornography using trafficked women and children. If Hefner were serious about supporting women, they'd lead the charge to regulate the pornography industry so that there were industry "seals" of approval on products and anyone who didn't use such products would know they were using documentation of rape to get off.

Bravo to the UK!

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

18. He said that? Jesus, it's like they hand picked him as a live, breathing straw man -- Hmmmm...

[SteveM]

22. Prohibitionism compounded by more prohibitionism...

The Second Oldest Profession ain't going away. I won't pretend that any scheme for legalized prostitution will be easy to institute or be perfectly just, but to further criminalize someone is like the powered cocaine/crack sentencing disparity: designed to put ever more people into jail for more lengthy sentences -- without solving anything.

I note you say: "It's all about protecting his erection." You realize, of course, that women (esp. from Europe and to some degree Canada) make Caribbean vacations where they rent out males to take care of those erections.

"In the grotto, in the greasy chair
Sits the Charlie with the lotion
And the kinky hair
With a smile
She says it all..."
-- Haitian Divorce, from The Royal Scam, Steely Dan, 1976 ABC Dunhill Records.

[petronius]

23. Typically you have to know that the property was stolen to be

charged with 'possession of stolen property.' IANAL, but I believe that there needs to be an element of intent (mens rea) in a crime as well as the act itself. Although it leads to unpalatable situations like johns pleading 'ignorance' of a sex worker's trafficked status, it seems that the need for intent allows the legal system to appropriately handle people with diminished capacity, for example. I'm not comfortable with changing that...

However, ignorance should not be an absolute excuse - if a reasonable person would believe that something was illegal (e.g., when someone offers you a great stereo for 10% of the price on the street corner it can't possibly be legit), then I think the requirements for proving knowledge and intent could be relaxed. So, if there is virtually no non-traficked sex trade, then a reasonable person would 'know' that he was participating in human trafficking.

[DavidMS]

51. I agree...

It would be very difficult to prosecute. That said, wouldn't it be better to chase the Pimps and trafficker and charge them with multiple counts of rape?

Or, make it very easy for women who are trafficked to get citizenship by turning their traffickers/pimps over to the police. And then pay for advertising in typical countries of origin telling women that if they are trafficked and they turn their pimps over to the police they get a free new passport. Radio Plays, TV Soap Operas could have plot lines dealing with trafficking (where the woman turns the tables on her tormentors) and signs in airports at customs regarding the laws on going to police. Much more affective.

[petronius]

52. Those are both really good ideas (nt)

[Scout]

20. ignorance is not an excuse for other crimes, so it shouldn't be for prostitution either

this should be an interesting thread....

:popcorn:

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

39. Ignorance OF THE LAW is no excuse.

Fail.

[Scout]

53. so now they KNOW THE LAW and then if they want to still have sex

with a prostitute they are taking their chances as to whether she is really giving free consent, or is a trafficked or otherwise coerced participant.

Pass.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

54. By that reasoning, you're taking such chances every time you buy a used iPod on eBay. -nt

[Scout]

61. i don't shop on eBay ... and there is that saying about "buyer beware" and

if it sounds too good to be true it probably is...

how's about some personal responsibility for one's actions here?

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

64. Yeah, but you'll only be out of $100 or so, not prosecuted by the police.

That's the extent of "buyer beware" and "personal responsibility."

[Scout]

67. if you are caught buying stolen merchandise, you certainly are open to prosecution n/t

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

69. Only if there's grounds to believe you know they are stolen. -nt

[Nevernose]

76. Depends on the state and on the police

Note that I am a fairly upright "law and order" type these days.

But, once upon a time, I had a friend who was stopped by two men in a parking lot who wanted to sell him a bicycle. I was with him, and witnessed the negotiations. He asked repeatedly if the bike was stolen, said repeatedly he didn't want to buy a stolen bike, and the guys selling the bike were incredibly believable (oxymoron intended). As soon as he gave them his $200, they slapped cuffs on him and took him to jail for possession of stolen property. Under the law in Nevada, there's no exception or clarification for the accused to have a reasonable knowledge that the property in question is stolen. So this guy now has a charge of possession of stolen property on his record.

I've told this story to a half dozen deputy DAs in this town since, and not one of them had a problem believing it -- they know how the cops in this town operate. All of these people believe the charge was bullshit, but all but one would have prosecuted anyway. The one hold-out is a close friend who is a right-wing lunatic who also happens to be the only deputy DA who I EVER saw deny cases based on constitutional grounds.

End notes:
About a year later the same undercover cops in the same dingy parking lot in the same beat-up blue van in the same bad neighborhood tried selling me some speakers. I led them on for almost an hour before saying, "Are you sure you guys aren't cops? Because I remember you arresting my friend last year..."

The friend of mine, whom I haven't spoken with in six years or so, probably deserved to be arrested. THe irony is that, out of the thousands of crimes he's probably committed, he finally got busted for one he really didn't commit.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

78. Jesus H. Fucking CHRIST, and people wonder why the police is generally disliked. -nt

[closeupready]

41. But the punishment does not fit the crime.

n/t

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

58. For some people, the "phrase "excessive punishment" is like "too tall basketball player."

I urge those people to move to Saudi Arabia. There, things are done the way they like. They'll be happier there.

[Redbear]

21. I'm not an English legal scholar, but I wonder if this law will stand up

to real life and a court test.

You can't set up sting operations to enforce because the "prostitute" is not "trafficked."

You will also have to get a prostitute to testify that she is being trafficked, which could put a price tag on her forehead. Good luck with that.

It's also hard to see how they attach a strict liability of "knowledge" concept without some objective standard as to why such knowledge would exist.

[Lance_Boyle]

56. In a sting, the "prostitute" is trafficked by police.

The female officers would not be soliciting without direct orders from their top-cop pimps. Forced prostitution. I'd say we should lock THOSE traffickers up in the general population.

[mondo joe]

28. I support decriminalization of prostitution. I also support the idea that any

person who pays for a prostitute they know or believe to be trafficked, or is otherwise under duress, should be charged with rape.

[babydollhead]

31. human traffickers even use children.

There are many awful things going on with people owning people.

[Blue_in_Mass]

44. This is a bad idea.

I know that this is the English criminal justice system, but it screams at me: MEN ARE BEING ASSUMED GUILTY. This is unfair.

[ismnotwasm]

46. It never was a defense.

I reject the notion that men who purchase sex are stupid, or are completely unaware of sex trafficking. Or give a shit really.


The problem with this is it won't stop trafficking. However, I've always liked the idea of complete decriminalization of prostitution and throwing johns in jail instead of prostitutes. Too long have prostitutes, mostly women, had to pay the price for someone else's sexual entitlement. Not going to happen though.

What's needed is serious economic reform with women and family positive economies in both developed and non-developed nations and an end to heterosexualism and colonial notions of white supremecy. If power is gendered and racialized, and power is owned by white males, what incentive do they have for supporting economic reform in countries like Korea or the Philippines where trafficked or not, women in sex work have made a large part of a service industry economy? None.

I also reject the notion that is is about some sort of sexual purity bullshit, when it's about social injustice and economic disparities almost too wide to contemplate.

[LisaL]

57. If prostitution is decriminalized, what would you throw the

"johns" in prison for? You are contradicting yourself.

[mrih]

60. Pimpin ain't easy

The man always trying to bring an entrepreneur down

[FedUpWithIt All]

62. I think prostitution should be legalized and regulated BUT...

I think it should be combined with something like the proposal mentioned in the OP. Legalization should carry a type of licensing. Going to someone who does not carry a license should carry severe penalties. In any legal system there is a cheaper, more violent underbelly. It happens with everything. Everything from drugs, tvs, cars and humans. Legalization is NOT always a complete answer. We cannot afford human trafficking to continue. People who traffic woman and children would be doing so outside the law. Anyone who would frequent the woman and children forced to work outside their will WOULD BE committing a form of rape and should be prosecuted.

The appeal for licensing would be obvious to women. In a regulated and licensed system, women would most likely get better pay, better health care and face less violence. Customers would be deterred by the stiffer penalties of going outside of legal would be more likely to seek out the (sometimes more costly and safe)regulated women.

Of course there would still be those SEEKING children which a legal system would not support..they SHOULD get a rape charge. A legalized system taking all the legitimate prostitution off the streets would simply make them easier to catch.

[JerseygirlCT]

66. Good. nt

[MattBaggins]

70. Good for the UK. We should do that here.

[eek MD]

74. Shall we lock up those who wear clothing made in sweatshops as well?

Just curious...

Or people who buy blood diamonds?

Human trafficking is wrong and horrendous. However, i think many on here believe that all prostitution is wrong, and are trying to further their agenda of scaring people out of doing it. It's not being done to protect the victims, but is being done to promote a puritanical agenda. If this was really about helping the victims, they would be going after the people doing the trafficking instead.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

79. BIN-FUCKING-GO!

You get it. :thumbsup: I opredict the punishist/puritan brigade will squeal and scream and whine about your post.