Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stamping Out Online Sex Trafficking May Have Pushed It Underground

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 361 posts

Re: Stamping Out Online Sex Trafficking May Have Pushed It Underground

#221

Post by turk73 »

at_a_remove wrote: post #190
bgorman wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Backpage was never popular for child sex trafficking. These are all lies told by various levels of the US government. Source: https://reason.com/2019/08/26/secret-memos-show-the-governme...

Those memos are pretty damning and run directly counter to what has been pushed in the media. Worse yet, it suggests that cooperation itself is what damned the organization when someone had to do something . This adds significantly to the mindset of "do not cooperate with the legal system even if you're trying to help, no good can come of it." And my already ebbing faith in the media has slipped even further.

Sure, except we just watched our freaking PRESIDENT get impeached for "contempt of Congress" which doesn't even have a law covering it, there is no such thing--not only do all Americans supposedly enjoy due process, we also can safely ignore a Congressional subpoena because it carries no legal requirement to show or act unlike the judicial version. So unless a court sends one out, you can choose to do as you please.

I swear I live in Clown World.

Also, the FBI really, really sucks.

So what difference does it make whether you cooperate or not? Either we have rights or we don't. I need to know because my daughter is learning the US Constitution in History class in 9th grade and I keep having to explain all the cognitive dissonance to her between what is clearly written and what is actually going on! It sucks!

Re: Stamping Out Online Sex Trafficking May Have Pushed It Underground

#222

Post by catalogia »

jessaustin wrote: post #136
catalogia wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Another socially responsible escort ad site was owned by a woman (former sex worker) and was forced to sell to a very shady eastern european gentlemen who is referred to as the trafficking king of europe. She sold because she didn’t want to go to jail. Was shutting it down somehow not an option? Better to shut it down than to give it to a gangster.

Parent says she didn't want to go to jail. Do you know her preferences better? ISTM most people don't want to go to jail.

It seems to me that the legal trouble would have come from continuing to operate the site, and by selling the site instead of deleting the database and shutting it down, she sold out those women.

But supposing she was being threatened with imprisonment unless she sold it, biting that bullet would have been the honorable thing to do. She owed that much to the people who trusted her with data of that nature.

Re: Stamping Out Online Sex Trafficking May Have Pushed It Underground

#223

Post by shams93 »

codingdave wrote: post #216
abstractbarista wrote: post #182

Its so simple for me. Just like with weed.... Legalize it! Why are we concerning ourselves with how people pleasure themselves in private? It's disgusting. Of course, have law enforcement root out the kiddie stuff, and have a legal framework to ensure safety (STI testing, etc) but my goodness, the efforts we currently go through to catch consenting adults in mutual benefit...

Sex trafficking is not consenting adults. There is a significant difference between a sex worker who voluntarily engages in their profession vs. people who are forced into it.

If you legalize it you can arrest the human traffickers while enabling professional sex workers to be professionals just look at the enlightened approach to the problem taken by Australia. No brothels allowed and no pimps but independent sex work is legal.

Re: Stamping Out Online Sex Trafficking May Have Pushed It Underground

#224

Post by thinkingemote »

Al-Khwarizmi wrote: post #116
paulgb wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was so infuriating to watch Democrats willingly get played by the religious right into supporting something that was so blatantly designed to legislate morality rather than actually help victims of trafficking. Glad that elected officials are now rethinking it, at least.

It seems to be a universal phenomenon (I see similar trends in many European countries, including mine) and I wouldn't use the word "played". The left seems to be as keen on legislating morality as the right.

Sex trafficking is slavery. It's something every political wing is against.

Re: Stamping Out Online Sex Trafficking May Have Pushed It Underground

#225

Post by M2Ys4U »

jm__87 wrote: post #142
np_tedious wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why shouldn't opiods be legal? Sure, they are bad. But so is tobacco. Most overdoses happen precisely because of unstable dosages or unexpected fentanyl.

I think you need to balance the risks of addiction and negative health consequences against the cost of having gangs/cartels profiting off of the fact that the substance is controlled. With marijuana, it is neither very addictive nor are the health consequences of using marijuana very severe, at least in the short term. Legalization is a bit of a no brainer for marijuana. Opioids are at the other end of the spectrum…

Decriminalisation (as opposed to legalisation) is a good step, though. Remove the jeopardy from seeking help from healthcare professionals and the state.

Keep the supply of the substances illegal, but provide safe places - staffed with medics - where people can have their drugs tested, take the drugs in as safe a way as possible and be signposted to rehab and recovery services, including mental health services.

Re: Stamping Out Online Sex Trafficking May Have Pushed It Underground

#226

Post by throwno »

overcast wrote: post #184
jandrese wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to be too mean here, but perhaps the OP doesn't have an easy time finding willing partners in the traditional dating scene. Maybe they have the kind of look that makes women swipe left.

It's possible, but in my experience, there is someone for everyone. I suppose if the goal is to hit way above your weight, paying makes sense. Money does seem to have that effect on women. But if you have that much, you should be able to pull it easily without prostitution?

What about in Asian countries that due to excessive abortion have a skewed male to female ratio? In those countries, there literally is not someone for everyone. That doesn't justify legalizing sex work, however. "Wow, we aborted all the women! I know, lets turn the few that are left into prostitutes!" No, that is sick.

Re: Stamping Out Online Sex Trafficking May Have Pushed It Underground

#227

Post by PhasmaFelis »

overcast wrote: post #172
bdhdbbdbdjdns wrote: post #104

As an occasional consumer of sex work, here is the reality: yes, It’s more dangerous now for both parties, but much more so for the women. The labor supply has gone down sharply because the economics went upside down. If you can’t count on as many clients per day the fixed cost of the hotel room becomes harder to risk so many girls exited the market. Prices have gone up sharply. The kind of girls that were charging $…

Just to satisfy my own curiosity, what is your use case for paying for sex? Married? High powered executive? I can't imagine paying for something that is easily free on a million different dating apps.

> I can't imagine paying for something that is easily free on a million different dating apps.

I have enough friends who use dating apps to know they're only "easy" if you're young, conventionally attractive, and (preferably) female. A typical middle-aged American guy can swipe through hundreds or thousands of profiles without even getting an response, let alone sex.

Re: Stamping Out Online Sex Trafficking May Have Pushed It Underground

#228

Post by mensetmanusman »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #125
Quarrelsome wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

which holds the implication that people as an abstract between now and ancient Egypt are not actually that different. They're just responding to different stimuli in their respective environments.

That's an implication a lot of people will do a lot of mental gymnastics to avoid because it means you can't just ignore the misadventures of various societies throughout history by saying "we're smarter now" or something like that.

None of the educated people I know would think “we’re smarter now” after studying history.

Re: Stamping Out Online Sex Trafficking May Have Pushed It Underground

#229

Post by wallace_f »

showdead wrote: post #213
0xcafecafe wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was going by the PP's premise of choosing one's one good over the greater good of society. What I observed was actually the opposite since that poor coal miner is against "higher taxes" & "socialism" even though it is directly benefiting him. That level of adherence to an ideology is what I found baffling (which has nothing to do with my own ideology).

It's because they have the "American dream" of rising to the top. https://youtu.be/xxD9nGL3NLY

Wall Street is getting another half trillion in cash injection from the Fed.

People who work for a living see it like this: they want a voluntary economy. That's why they vote against "socialism." Most welfare we have goes to the rich.

Re: Stamping Out Online Sex Trafficking May Have Pushed It Underground

#230

Post by overcast »

colmvp wrote: post #218
overcast wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's possible, but in my experience, there is someone for everyone. I suppose if the goal is to hit way above your weight, paying makes sense. Money does seem to have that effect on women. But if you have that much, you should be able to pull it easily without prostitution?

> It's possible, but in my experience, there is someone for everyone. lol citation needed. I've used dating apps for the last four years. I've gotten maybe 3-4 dates per year, and 0 relationships out of it.

Please take this as friendly. It sounds like maybe you're setting your expectations too high, and not giving other women a chance. In my experience women take what you write in your profile seriously. Spend what you would consider an inordinate amount of time perfecting it, like you would a resume for big job prospect. Get great photos taken of yourself, this doesn't require money or a professional service. Find good light, take lots, use the best of them. Grainy, poorly lit, unflattering photos will be dismissed quickly. Don't make them all selfies. You want to show off your best features, and what makes you, well you.

But seriously, work on what you say in your profile. Nearly every response I get from a woman, is about how well my profile is written.

Post reply on HN