Going undercover as a sex worker • Hacker News Board

Re: Going undercover as a sex worker

#151

Post by pluma » Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 4:08 PM UTC

kirsebaer wrote: post #122

pluma wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Human trafficking is, essentially, modern slavery. As far as I know the two biggest sources of victims are: 1. people (frequently children, especially girls and women) being "sold" into slavery out of financial desperation or pressure from organized crime. 2. emigrants being tricked by traffickers, thinking they're buying a ticket to freedom in a better place but actually accruing "debt" they are then forced to "pay…

> Human trafficking is, essentially, modern slavery. Almost all "human trafficking" is willing migrants paying someone to help them cross a border (into US, EU, etc).

There seem to be multiple definitions.

I'm specifically talking about human trafficking the way it is described in the article: people either being moved against their will or tricked/forced into a situation where they are being held against their will (e.g. by taking their papers and forcing them to "pay off" their debt as sex workers). This meaning is called "Menschenhandel" (literally "trade of humans") in German.

Calling illegal migration "human trafficking" isn't particularly helpful though it's probably a valid use of the term (the analogy being drug trafficking, or the illegal transfer of people or objects across borders).

Re: Going undercover as a sex worker

#152

Post by nostrebored » Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 4:10 PM UTC

netcan wrote: post #50

danparsonson wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite right but it is still a choice, they at least have some agency. I'm not in any way attempting to downplay the awful situations we're discussing, but there is still a significant psychological difference between "I'm doing this to make my life and my families lives better" and "This is being done to me against my will for other peoples' benefit", is there not?

I disagree. The line between consensual, coerced or exploited are sometimes vague but they are real. It's like the pornography line. It's vague, some things are grey, it's culturally contextual but it is a real line. people usually know it when they see it. When extremely disempowered, poor and desperate people interact with much richer, more powerful people who see them as just a means to an end and are completely c…

I would argue that that 'Pornography line' is a very personal distinction you've made. Pornography still crosses the line into coerced and exploited. Read the firsthand accounts of women who have left the porn industry. Watch documentaries about people going into the porn industry. These are people who are desperate and taken advantage of, hurt and abused. I've seen a few statistics, but all of them have said that the average life expectancy of a porn performer is under 50, due to the high rates of suicide and drug abuse. I really don't see much grey there -- I don't think letting poor people sell their kidneys is moral, just like I don't think pornography is moral.

Completely agree with the rest of your post though.

Re: Going undercover as a sex worker

#153

Post by nostrebored » Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 4:11 PM UTC

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #150

nostrebored wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How senseless outlawing prostitution is? That's absurd. Look at the efficacy of the Nordic model. Prostitution is coerced sex in which a woman loses her autonomy, and in the case of desperation, her ability to say yes or no to potential 'clients'. It's a very clear objectification in which not only is the work stigmatized, it's also not productive for the woman -- working in a coal mine is valuable job experience tha…

> Look at the efficacy of the Nordic model. The Nordic model is less efficient than decriminalisation. It drives sex workers underground, giving them less protection.

Legalization has shown an increase in human trafficking to Germany. The use of unions has also been stigmatized by the pimps -- sorry, "Brothel owners" to the point that they're completely ineffective. Surprise, surprise, vulnerable women are still exploited. How can you call that effective?

Re: Going undercover as a sex worker

#154

Post by JoeAltmaier » Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 4:13 PM UTC

nostrebored wrote: post #152

netcan wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. The line between consensual, coerced or exploited are sometimes vague but they are real. It's like the pornography line. It's vague, some things are grey, it's culturally contextual but it is a real line. people usually know it when they see it. When extremely disempowered, poor and desperate people interact with much richer, more powerful people who see them as just a means to an end and are completely c…

I would argue that that 'Pornography line' is a very personal distinction you've made. Pornography still crosses the line into coerced and exploited. Read the firsthand accounts of women who have left the porn industry. Watch documentaries about people going into the porn industry. These are people who are desperate and taken advantage of, hurt and abused. I've seen a few statistics, but all of them have said that th…

There's a lot of muddy water here. Self-selection for one. Who knows whether the folks going into the business are already selected for an mtbf of 50?

'Desperate and taken advantage of' is a big category, and those folks often come to no great end. Its not a unique feature of this industry - heck even WalMart employees fit there. Cause and effect might be getting confused here.

Re: Going undercover as a sex worker

#155

Post by anon3_ » Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 4:14 PM UTC

netcan wrote: post #46

smorrow wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a perfectly valid comment until it's proven wrong. I don't think it should be "LA LA LA I'm not list-en-ing"-downvoted.

No it isn't. First of all, it is weaselly. It is saying that "there is a counterargument" without actually making it. Then, it sort of vaguely draws the conclusion that because there are instances of lying related to human trafficking in the world, the whole concept of human trafficking is a lie. That's like taking the case of a false rape claim and encouraging everyone to understand that women lie about rape.

"Human trafficking" and "Human rights" - I disagree, those words are weaselly.

It's trying to sneak away imagery of pain and powerlessness, for selfish interests. How dare these people intrude on the lives of others and act as if they know what's better, stealing hundreds of millions of dollars a year.

You want to know how to make money? Go into business spitting liberal epithets and get funded by UN, governments and NPO's. These guys are frauds that need to be exposed. They distract us from the real victims.

Re: Going undercover as a sex worker

#156

Post by lukeschlather » Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 4:16 PM UTC

autokad wrote: post #147

belorn wrote: post #29

When reading works like this one I tend to find three stories being merged into one. It focuses on slavery where most of the evil aspects of humans tend to come out, as in order to reduce a human person into something that can be traded, everything that gives that person a social context must be torn down. This is where the "break down" period comes from and it's a common theme in everything from the African slave tr…

I disagree with your last assessment. men who need to take terrible jobs are often disposable cogs, but when women have to do it they are victims, a call to action is needed, etc. I had spoken to several women who entered 'the trade'. they got money for flight,plastic surgery,room, and board. because of that, a lot of their money is kept until they 'finish their contract' and go back to their home country. human slav…

Please don't make this into some stupid men vs. women debate. If you want to do something about men who are forced to take terrible jobs, go join one of the many labor rights organizations in the world. Don't slander people focusing on a specific kind of coerced labor.

Re: Going undercover as a sex worker

#157

Post by rosser » Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 4:17 PM UTC

alphapapa wrote: post #143

tptacek wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those playing along at home, the "flag" button appears if you click on the timestamp on the above comment. When you see bigoted trolls on HN, don't have a conversation with them, just flag them off the site.

Typical. Nothing I said was untrue, nor even an opinion. They're all facts. Instead of reasoning with me and proving me wrong, you reach for the "bigot" card and refuse to have a conversation. That is being a troll. No big surprise, though. Much easier to click a button and silence those who disagree with you than write a reasonable counter-argument. Well, at least the truth is out there for those who want to find it…

In my entire tenure on HN, I have never wanted to reply to a comment with something that would get me flagged so strongly as this.

That deserves some kind of award.

Re: Going undercover as a sex worker

#158

Post by TazeTSchnitzel » Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 4:18 PM UTC

nostrebored wrote: post #153

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Look at the efficacy of the Nordic model. The Nordic model is less efficient than decriminalisation. It drives sex workers underground, giving them less protection.

Legalization has shown an increase in human trafficking to Germany. The use of unions has also been stigmatized by the pimps -- sorry, "Brothel owners" to the point that they're completely ineffective. Surprise, surprise, vulnerable women are still exploited. How can you call that effective?

Germany doesn't have decriminalisation, it has regulation.

Re: Going undercover as a sex worker

#159

Post by nostrebored » Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 4:19 PM UTC

JoeAltmaier wrote: post #154

nostrebored wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that that 'Pornography line' is a very personal distinction you've made. Pornography still crosses the line into coerced and exploited. Read the firsthand accounts of women who have left the porn industry. Watch documentaries about people going into the porn industry. These are people who are desperate and taken advantage of, hurt and abused. I've seen a few statistics, but all of them have said that th…

There's a lot of muddy water here. Self-selection for one. Who knows whether the folks going into the business are already selected for an mtbf of 50? 'Desperate and taken advantage of' is a big category, and those folks often come to no great end. Its not a unique feature of this industry - heck even WalMart employees fit there. Cause and effect might be getting confused here.

However, Walmart employers do not offer their potential addict employees drugs before they go to work. They don't have them participate in labor that frequently compromises their ability to work with no effort to support them when this happens. The employees of Walmart have actual worker's rights and nearly universal standards of employment in this country, while Pornography, especially amateur pornography, has none of this.

The self-selection claim is not independent from the claim I'm making -- in fact I find them to be very correlated. You're getting a specific subset of people who are willing to do Pornography, most notably people who are desperate, potentially addicted/suicidal young women. Providing them this predatory avenue and calling it 'empowerment' is beyond unethical.

Re: Going undercover as a sex worker

#160

Post by nostrebored » Mon, Jun 22, 2015, 4:25 PM UTC

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #158

nostrebored wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Legalization has shown an increase in human trafficking to Germany. The use of unions has also been stigmatized by the pimps -- sorry, "Brothel owners" to the point that they're completely ineffective. Surprise, surprise, vulnerable women are still exploited. How can you call that effective?

Germany doesn't have decriminalisation, it has regulation.

Sorry, you're correct and I edited my post to reflect that. Are you arguing for completely unregulated decriminalization? You really don't think that this would cause an increase in trafficking? If an attempt at legalization with measures to curb trafficking didn't work, how would literally letting pimps operate with impunity be a better solution?

Here's a paper with some links to how decrim has worked in Auckland: http://www.prostitutionresearch.com/Report%20on%20NZ%2010-29...

As we've reached the nested reply limit here: It would let pimps operate with impunity because the service which they are having others sell is no longer an issue? While not all sex workers are trafficked, even those who are not trafficked have pimps. The WHISPER study from the late 80's said that almost 90% of women interviewed had pimps during their time in prostitution. Full decriminalization by it's very nature makes pimping legal -- that's one of its tenants. If you think there is going to be a shortage of abusive/exploitative people waiting in line for that opportunity, we live in very different worlds.

Also, the Nordic model gets around that by only criminalizing the sex-work for the person buying it. When arrests are made, the prostitute is asked if they would like assistance with leaving the industry, if they answer no then they are free to go.

@abandonliberty I would argue that it shows that given what we currently know, the Nordic model of decriminalization for sex workers and criminalization of sex buyers seems to be the most effective at reducing the harms of prostitution. Seeing as both street prostitution, which is dangerous, and human trafficking have been on the decline since it's implementation, and the results have not been the same in other countries in which legalization/decrim have been attempted, it's the prudent course of action.