61–70 of 308 posts
FWIW, this headline is not completely accurate. The story itself says further down the page, "Ferrer was arrested on felony charges of pimping a minor, pimping, and conspiracy to commit pimping." None of these are actually trafficking charges; they're run-of-the-mill prostitution charges. There's also a story from a young girl who was forced into sex work, which is certainly awful, and some stuff about studies and cl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most sex workers agree that their safety is improved dramatically by having the business side of it out in the open. And, there have been studies on sex worker safety that indicate strongly that legal prostitution is safer for everyone; it also reduces coercion when it is not underground (women don't need a pimp, if law enforcement is on their side). Since I started paying attention a few years ago, I've noticed that…
I think mutual consent and money for sex are probably fine. The problem is that reality isn't black and white. Trafficking is very real, especially in Chinese communities, where victims are shuffled all over the place on cheap intercity busses. These are complex problems, and the typical HN lazze faire approach doesn't address that complexity.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one should feel shame at having a toilet at the office and needing to pay someone to help clean it. Everyone should feel shame at coercing a person who would otherwise not have sex with them into having sex with them. Buying someone's labor is different than buying their bodily autonomy and consent to sex.
Coercion requires threats or force. Do you think all prostitution involves threats or force? And wouldn't autonomy include the freedom to do with your body as you see fit?
If it were about freedom, you would see people of all economic conditions choosing to prostitute themselves. But you don't.
Why is it that in such cases, the government reaches for the CEO right away; but when Wells Fargo employees open millions of fraudulent accounts, it's not the CEO's fault? If I were to commit identity theft (which is basically what the WF employees did), then I would be facing jail time; why hasn't anyone in WF been charged with criminal fraud yet? Why not the CEO?
You're comparing apples and oranges. The CEO of a small internet company almost certainly has a hand in everything the company does. The CEO of a large corporation has no idea what the line workers are doing.[1] If a bunch of Yahoo employees had gone off and run as sex-trafficking site off Yahoo's servers, they wouldn't go arrest Marissa Mayer. Not because "lobbying" but because that would be stupid and unreasonable.…
And there are also the companies that are convinced of fraud like Deutsche Bank, but it's the company that pays a huge fine when the executives who were overseeing all this go unscathed.
I have worked in a bank and I know a lot of people there have no clue what's going on, but the fact that it's true does not mean it's a valid excuse. If I kill a pedestrian with my car I can not claim it's not my fault because I had my eyes closed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, it's shameful to force someone to do something without their consent. Your interpretation of consent seems very bizarre however. Inherently anyone paying anyone else to do anything means they wouldn't have done it without getting paid. Does that mean they didn't consent?
No, it's shameful to coerce someone into having sex without their consent, not merely to coerce someone to "do something." The rest of your question is not relevant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The CEO has money, connections, and the thin veneer of respectability. The issues involved are not so simple and emotive as the ones relating to sex and minors. You know... the usual bullshit.
Plus the person who has him arrested is running for US Senate and sees a free way to get extra press coverage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, it's shameful to coerce someone into having sex without their consent, not merely to coerce someone to "do something." The rest of your question is not relevant.
So it's not shameful to force someone to perform manual labor without their consent? Why not?
Coerced sex is rape, however. It is qualitatively different from coerced labor. As Dworkin wrote a long time ago, "in prostitution, no woman stays whole. It is impossible to use a human body in the way women's bodies are used in prostitution and to have a whole human being at the end of it, or in the middle of it, or close to the beginning of it. It's impossible. And no woman gets whole again later, after."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Run-of-the-mill" in that sentence modifies "prostitution". When I read that person's sentence I think, "So, what kind of prostitution charge is average or not special? That kind." That's what they think, anyway. Whether this is true or false could be validated by seeing what kind of prostitution cases are commonly brought vs uncommonly brought.
> So, what kind of prostitution charge is average or not special? That kind. I don't even want to know how you consider a child prostitution charge "average or not special".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> there are those who believe that sex work can never truly be consensual...idealized circumstances free of such pressures, few people would choose sex work In idealized circumstances free of economic pressures many of us would spent all day at the beach. It's great many found their dream career and are getting paid to do what they love. But for most what work is just work, a means to an end. Not sure why sex workers…
No one should feel shame at having a toilet at the office and needing to pay someone to help clean it. Everyone should feel shame at coercing a person who would otherwise not have sex with them into having sex with them. Buying someone's labor is different than buying their bodily autonomy and consent to sex.
What really matters is the safety of the person(s) involved. And yet, there are plenty of occupations where safety is in question.
Why is it that in such cases, the government reaches for the CEO right away; but when Wells Fargo employees open millions of fraudulent accounts, it's not the CEO's fault? If I were to commit identity theft (which is basically what the WF employees did), then I would be facing jail time; why hasn't anyone in WF been charged with criminal fraud yet? Why not the CEO?
You're comparing apples and oranges. The CEO of a small internet company almost certainly has a hand in everything the company does. The CEO of a large corporation has no idea what the line workers are doing.[1] If a bunch of Yahoo employees had gone off and run as sex-trafficking site off Yahoo's servers, they wouldn't go arrest Marissa Mayer. Not because "lobbying" but because that would be stupid and unreasonable.…
Personally I think they could find out about a lot of wrongdoing if they wanted to.