9 ms·

I vacillate on this. On the one hand, I don't think prostitution should be illegal. On the other hand, it's not clear whether marketplaces like backpage bring

by bmpafa 9y ago

I vacillate on this. On the one hand, I don't think prostitution should be illegal. On the other hand, it's not clear whether marketplaces like backpage bring the black-market closer to the light of day & make things safer for sex workers, or if they amplify demand to the point where suppliers have incentive to find new sex workers using more and more coercive methods.

jordigh 9y ago
Yeah, me too. It's hard to know what to believe. The thing is, those engaged in commercial sex have a vested interest in defending deregulation of all parts of it: that way they make more money. If you were to try to pass legislation that, for example, would require a license to purchase sex and that the license would be granted only upon passing sexual health medical exams, people selling sex would see this as an obstacle to getting as many clients as possible. I know several people think you can just tell at a glance if someone has an STI and that condoms give all the protection you need. I think there are a lot of vulnerable people in the sex trade who just aren't speaking up because, well, they're vulnerable. Not everyone is vulnerable, of course. There are those who are perfectly ok and happy and vocal. But that can't be everyone.
- shkkmo 9y ago
  > people selling sex would see this as an obstacle to getting as many clients as possible What is your basis for this assertion? I think having a tool that makes it easier to vet clients could just as easily be a boon to many sex workers that would allow them to safely see more clients?
  - jordigh 9y ago
    I've often seen sex workers object to that sort of thing online. They really don't want their clients to face any obstacle at all. People often advocate for checking the sexual health of the sellers, but you never hear about the same checks for the buyers. Why is that? It's pretty likely a sex worker will chime in on this thread. Then we'll hear their opinions first-hand.
    - shkkmo 9y ago
      >but you never hear about the same checks for the buyers. Why is that? New Zealand requires buyers to adopt safer sex practices or be fined. I don't know to what degree this is enforced.
- kwillets 9y ago
  Deregulation is the last thing that, eg, drug dealers want; they profit from the black market.
  - jordigh 9y ago
    I don't think the situation is comparable when you're both the dealer and the product.
    - danharaj 9y ago
      Prostitution is a service, prostitutes aren't products.
      - jordigh 9y ago
        They are for pimps.
    - DanBC 9y ago
      That's not the case for some of the people being advertised in Backpage. > The spreadsheet attached to Padilla’s email indicates that the following words (among others) were automatically deleted from adult ads by the Strip Term From Ad filter before ads were published: • “lolita” (and its misspelled variant, “lollita”) • “teenage” • “rape” • “young” Note that they'd still run the ad. https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report%202017.01.10%20FINAL.pdf https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report...
  - shkkmo 9y ago
    Calling it "deregulation" is a weird term to use for this. "Decriminalization" or "legalization" is the term you are looking for. Generally legalization comes with increased regulation. While profits are higher (for some tiers of drug dealers), this is because the risks are correspondingly higher. Certainly those whose share of the drug profits is due to their capacity for violence and high risk tolerance are opposed to legalization. However, I suspect many of the producers and sellers whose share of profits depend on their industry knowledge find legalization attractive precisely because of the security and safety it can bring.
chillingeffect 9y ago
To help you decide, consider what you think of when you hear "prostitution." Do you think of women standing on a street corner smoking and getting in cars and getting beat up by pimps and unable to go to the police for help like in 80s movies? Or do you think of something more like a doctor's office with security cameras, a receptionist, online reviews? Because it seems modern, legal prostitution is a lot more like a medical service, similar to how veterinarians calm a cat in heat [1]. [1] https://everything2.com/title/How+to+calm+a+cat+in+heat https://everything2.com/title/How+to+calm+a+cat+in+heat
- nomy99 9y ago
  LOL, (go ahead HN downvote this but this is funny)
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
DanBC 9y ago
Sex ads in general are probably a good idea. The Backpage version, where they knowingly facilited ads for children who'd been kidnapped, drugged, and were being raped for money, is a bad idea. It's really fucking weird reading this thread and seeing so much support for backpage. I hope it's because people don't know what Backpage were actually doing. https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report%202017.01.10%20FINAL.pdf https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report...
- thaumaturgy 9y ago
  Appreciate you linking the report here and elsewhere. I haven't used backpage or the services of a sex worker; I'm somewhat aware that sex trafficking is a problem, although I haven't seen any information on what the size and scope of the problem really is. So, I'm fairly neutral here. All that said, I'm reading especially "Findings (II.B)" and I'm not really convinced that child sex trafficking was really an intention with the site; at worst, it sounds like they weren't super aggressive about dealing with it (which, itself, isn't great). From those pages: > Backpage itself reports cases of suspected child exploitation to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children; in some months Backpage has transmitted hundreds of such reports to NCMEC.2 ... > NCMEC paid Backpage $3000 to host ads for eight underage girls, including one 13-year-old girl advertised in hundreds of cities across the United States; NCMEC later claimed that the image of the 13-year-old was posted online instantly and received over 30 calls within seven minutes of going live. Although Ferrer disputed NCMEC’s claim in an internal email a week later, asserting that the ad triggered a fraud alert and was removed from the site in less than two minutes, he admitted: "NCMEC posted 8 underage pics. We have not found all of them." Were these photos of girls who were clearly underage? Depending on photo content, it can be practically impossible for the average person to correctly guess a subject's age, or even just whether or not they're a minority. NCMEC even says as much: > NCMEC has noted, "it is virtually impossible to determine how old the young women in these ads are without an in-depth criminal investigation. The pimps try to make the 15 year olds look 23. And the distinction of whether the person in the ad is 17 or 18 is pretty arbitrary." This is either damning -- if the photos were the sort that the average person could immediately identify as underage -- or kind of a skeezy move by NCMEC. Andrew Padilla, head of moderation: > And even if an age verification was a deterrent to someone hoping to post an ad on Backpage to traffic a minor, it doesn’t mean they’re going to stop trying to traffic a minor. It only means they won’t be doing it on our site, where Backpage, NCMEC and law enforcement are in the best position to put an actual stop to the crime. Assuming they were operating in good faith with NCMEC (not an assumption I'm committed to), he makes a reasonable point. And how would an effective age verification system be built for a site like this? > Backpage documents also suggest the company failed to use its evaluation and training procedures to impress the seriousness of child exploitation upon its employees. As part of its investigation, Subcommittee staff examined several performance reviews for Backpage moderators... Okay, if you're going to run a site like this, trying to identify child exploitation should be a much higher priority than this paragraph describes. Still though, I'm leaning more towards "incompetent and poor judgement" than "malicious intent" here.
stephengillie 9y ago
Prostitution is illegal because it leads directly into slavery. Why rent who you can buy?
- TallGuyShort 9y ago
  And paying a worker hourly under the table is different how?
  - Natsu 9y ago
    I'm not sure it is. It's also illegal and businesses that do a lot of that are regularly raided once the authorities become aware of them.
    - TallGuyShort 9y ago
      But parent was saying leading to slavery is WHY it's illegal. Not a consequence of it being illegal. By that logic jobs should be illegal in general.

by bmpafa 9y ago

jordigh 9y ago

Yeah, me too. It's hard to know what to believe. The thing is, those engaged in commercial sex have a vested interest in defending deregulation of all parts of it: that way they make more money. If you were to try to pass legislation that, for example, would require a license to purchase sex and that the license would be granted only upon passing sexual health medical exams, people selling sex would see this as an obstacle to getting as many clients as possible. I know several people think you can just tell at a glance if someone has an STI and that condoms give all the protection you need. I think there are a lot of vulnerable people in the sex trade who just aren't speaking up because, well, they're vulnerable. Not everyone is vulnerable, of course. There are those who are perfectly ok and happy and vocal. But that can't be everyone.

shkkmo 9y ago
> people selling sex would see this as an obstacle to getting as many clients as possible What is your basis for this assertion? I think having a tool that makes it easier to vet clients could just as easily be a boon to many sex workers that would allow them to safely see more clients?
- jordigh 9y ago
  I've often seen sex workers object to that sort of thing online. They really don't want their clients to face any obstacle at all. People often advocate for checking the sexual health of the sellers, but you never hear about the same checks for the buyers. Why is that? It's pretty likely a sex worker will chime in on this thread. Then we'll hear their opinions first-hand.
  - shkkmo 9y ago
    >but you never hear about the same checks for the buyers. Why is that? New Zealand requires buyers to adopt safer sex practices or be fined. I don't know to what degree this is enforced.
kwillets 9y ago
Deregulation is the last thing that, eg, drug dealers want; they profit from the black market.
- jordigh 9y ago
  I don't think the situation is comparable when you're both the dealer and the product.
  - danharaj 9y ago
    Prostitution is a service, prostitutes aren't products.
    - jordigh 9y ago
      They are for pimps.
  - DanBC 9y ago
    That's not the case for some of the people being advertised in Backpage. > The spreadsheet attached to Padilla’s email indicates that the following words (among others) were automatically deleted from adult ads by the Strip Term From Ad filter before ads were published: • “lolita” (and its misspelled variant, “lollita”) • “teenage” • “rape” • “young” Note that they'd still run the ad. https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report%202017.01.10%20FINAL.pdf https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report...
- shkkmo 9y ago
  Calling it "deregulation" is a weird term to use for this. "Decriminalization" or "legalization" is the term you are looking for. Generally legalization comes with increased regulation. While profits are higher (for some tiers of drug dealers), this is because the risks are correspondingly higher. Certainly those whose share of the drug profits is due to their capacity for violence and high risk tolerance are opposed to legalization. However, I suspect many of the producers and sellers whose share of profits depend on their industry knowledge find legalization attractive precisely because of the security and safety it can bring.

chillingeffect 9y ago

To help you decide, consider what you think of when you hear "prostitution." Do you think of women standing on a street corner smoking and getting in cars and getting beat up by pimps and unable to go to the police for help like in 80s movies? Or do you think of something more like a doctor's office with security cameras, a receptionist, online reviews? Because it seems modern, legal prostitution is a lot more like a medical service, similar to how veterinarians calm a cat in heat [1]. [1] https://everything2.com/title/How+to+calm+a+cat+in+heat https://everything2.com/title/How+to+calm+a+cat+in+heat

nomy99 9y ago
LOL, (go ahead HN downvote this but this is funny)
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

DanBC 9y ago

Sex ads in general are probably a good idea. The Backpage version, where they knowingly facilited ads for children who'd been kidnapped, drugged, and were being raped for money, is a bad idea. It's really fucking weird reading this thread and seeing so much support for backpage. I hope it's because people don't know what Backpage were actually doing. https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report%202017.01.10%20FINAL.pdf https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report...

thaumaturgy 9y ago
Appreciate you linking the report here and elsewhere. I haven't used backpage or the services of a sex worker; I'm somewhat aware that sex trafficking is a problem, although I haven't seen any information on what the size and scope of the problem really is. So, I'm fairly neutral here. All that said, I'm reading especially "Findings (II.B)" and I'm not really convinced that child sex trafficking was really an intention with the site; at worst, it sounds like they weren't super aggressive about dealing with it (which, itself, isn't great). From those pages: > Backpage itself reports cases of suspected child exploitation to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children; in some months Backpage has transmitted hundreds of such reports to NCMEC.2 ... > NCMEC paid Backpage $3000 to host ads for eight underage girls, including one 13-year-old girl advertised in hundreds of cities across the United States; NCMEC later claimed that the image of the 13-year-old was posted online instantly and received over 30 calls within seven minutes of going live. Although Ferrer disputed NCMEC’s claim in an internal email a week later, asserting that the ad triggered a fraud alert and was removed from the site in less than two minutes, he admitted: "NCMEC posted 8 underage pics. We have not found all of them." Were these photos of girls who were clearly underage? Depending on photo content, it can be practically impossible for the average person to correctly guess a subject's age, or even just whether or not they're a minority. NCMEC even says as much: > NCMEC has noted, "it is virtually impossible to determine how old the young women in these ads are without an in-depth criminal investigation. The pimps try to make the 15 year olds look 23. And the distinction of whether the person in the ad is 17 or 18 is pretty arbitrary." This is either damning -- if the photos were the sort that the average person could immediately identify as underage -- or kind of a skeezy move by NCMEC. Andrew Padilla, head of moderation: > And even if an age verification was a deterrent to someone hoping to post an ad on Backpage to traffic a minor, it doesn’t mean they’re going to stop trying to traffic a minor. It only means they won’t be doing it on our site, where Backpage, NCMEC and law enforcement are in the best position to put an actual stop to the crime. Assuming they were operating in good faith with NCMEC (not an assumption I'm committed to), he makes a reasonable point. And how would an effective age verification system be built for a site like this? > Backpage documents also suggest the company failed to use its evaluation and training procedures to impress the seriousness of child exploitation upon its employees. As part of its investigation, Subcommittee staff examined several performance reviews for Backpage moderators... Okay, if you're going to run a site like this, trying to identify child exploitation should be a much higher priority than this paragraph describes. Still though, I'm leaning more towards "incompetent and poor judgement" than "malicious intent" here.

stephengillie 9y ago

Prostitution is illegal because it leads directly into slavery. Why rent who you can buy?

TallGuyShort 9y ago
And paying a worker hourly under the table is different how?
- Natsu 9y ago
  I'm not sure it is. It's also illegal and businesses that do a lot of that are regularly raided once the authorities become aware of them.
  - TallGuyShort 9y ago
    But parent was saying leading to slavery is WHY it's illegal. Not a consequence of it being illegal. By that logic jobs should be illegal in general.