"Prostitutes face jail under tougher law" - The Guardian

[demoleft]

Here we go again.

Who must face the jail?
The prostitute? For what? For a personal choice?
The "customer"? For what? For a personal choice?

The law causes protests as it seems "designed" for "lost" women to save.
Who's going to save the lost "hooked" ones?
I mean - those highly respected gentlemen who are back to their families after the "break"?

"The government was last night accused of turning the clock back 25 years by introducing a law that will allow courts to imprison prostitutes who are arrested for soliciting. The move has provoked the fury of women's support groups, who say the move will do nothing to address the root causes of the illicit trade in sex."

What's the root? Many men pay money to have sex with women. So these men are the problem. Am I wrong?
Yes, it seems.

"Under the law, prostitutes caught soliciting can be ordered to attend three meetings with a court-appointed expert to discuss 'ending their involvement' with prostitution. Magistrates will be able to summon those who fail to attend the sessions before a court. Those who do not obey the summons can be arrested and imprisoned for up to 72 hours."

Who decides what one's life should be?
"'It's a new way to lock women up for consenting to sex; it's just appalling,' said Nina Lopez, spokeswoman for the English Collective of Prostitutes. 'You can't force women into rehabilitation.'"

"'This is yet another example of the state's wish to exert moral disapproval of prostitution while recognizing that it will not go away,' said Harry Fletcher, assistant general-secretary of the probation officers' union, Napo. 'The threat of custody is extremely punitive.'"

The Government assures the extreme measure will be used in few cases. Jails overflow with criminals. No room.

But the question is: has this all to do with sex or with simply selling oneself for money?
Because in the second case (in Italy for example) I'd have a list of colleagues, managers, wannabee managers, wannabee models and TV starlettes and common people that have been trying to sell themselves since so long that they should face long long days in jail...

So I suspect it has to do with sex. And prostitutes have to pay for the good conscience of a good society.
I'm with the women's groups of protest. As a man who loves women and want them respected in their personal choices. To "force" someone to be someone else is violent and simply not democratic.

The Guardian, Sunday August 12, 2007: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2147181,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=networkfront

[Madspirit]

1. k&r...n/t

[acmavm]

2. There are different forms of prostitution. For example, Barbara Walters

has admitted she did some things that some would look down on to promote her career. She prostituted herself just as much as some poor woman on the street. Would see, or any woman like her who made it big or advanced their career be sent to prison.

I'd send Barbara anyway. But for other reasons.

[lazer47]

3. Is that like Repubs have prostituted themselves to GWB???

and the MSM, and certain Dems, and the 26%..

[Kagemusha]

4. Forget the moral issue. Britain has no room in prison for them!!

And that's not some secret. Doing this in the middle of a prison overcrowding crisis is outright nuts.

[SpiralHawk]

5. "This is an outrage." - Republicon Diaper Liberation Front (DLF)

"How are we supposed to get our jollies?"

- Sen David Vitter,
for the Republicon Diaper Liberation Front (DLF)

[gollygee]

6. Do they say whether men who hire prositutes will face tougher laws too?

or are they basically targeting women?

[demoleft]

8. Men are not mentioned in the article...

I found this here: http://www.prostitutionreform.co.uk/

"In all of the UK, paying for sex with a woman is not illegal. These laws firmly place the criminality of prostitution on the women. Why does the law criminalise the supply of sexual services but not the demand? With other illegal activities such as drugs, both the supply and the demand are criminalised."

I don't know who powers this website but I had a look at the links (and clicked on the London Feminist Network) and though it is not updated I think they would like a different law.

The London Feminist Network is organizing many initiatives against rape and violence. Here: http://www.ldnfeministnetwork.ik.com/

[iverglas]

9. very interesting site

Also from that link:

Many arguments have suggested that prostitution will always exist, either openly or underground depending on the prevailing legality, due to the inherent nature of men and women. Whilst it may emerge that men will always be prepared to pay for sex, it does not appear that society has made any attempt to challenge this notion or that comprehensive research has been undertaken to assess what motivates the desire to pay for sex.

Just because there is the desire to pay for sex, it does not necessarily mean we should pander to this desire, or that this desire is acceptable in today’s society.

We seem afraid to challenge the basic notion that men have a right to sex on demand in return for the payment of money. Why are we scared to challenge this theory? Over one hundred years ago Josephine Butler questioned the accepted norm with her pioneering work but rather than moving forward, society has instead retreated from tackling this fundamental issue.

You did kind of cherrypick the part you quoted. In context, it goes like this:

Currently in the UK, prostitution is not illegal however the laws serve to make providing sex in exchange for money difficult and dangerous. Soliciting (advertising sexual services), streetwalking and brothels (where more than one woman sells sex in an apartment) are illegal. Kerb crawling is illegal in most of the UK but different laws apply in Scotland. These laws are currently under review and a draft bill is in the process of consultation. In all of the UK, paying for sex with a woman is not illegal. These laws firmly place the criminality of prostitution on the women. Why does the law criminalise the supply of sexual services but not the demand? With other illegal activities such as drugs, both the supply and the demand are criminalised.

"Kerb (curb) crawling" is the kind of activity that goes on in my neighobourhood -- would-be johns driving around in cars, pulling up beside women on the sidewalk, and either waiting for the response they are looking for or actively soliciting. So it appears that the UK outlaws soliciting behaviour by both prostitutes and johns, although perhaps not the full range of soliciting behaviours by johns.

This is fairly similar to the situation in Canada: prostitution is not illegal, but keeping/being in a brothel and living off the avails of prostitution, and soliciting for the purposes of prostitution, are. Because of constitutionally protected freedom of speech, only certain soliciting activities in public can be criminalized. This may be a problem in the UK too.

The organization appears to favour "the Swedish approach", about which I have posted information at DU recently; it was also favoured by the committee of the Canadian Senate that examined these issues earlier this year. That website says:

The introduction of Sweden’s groundbreaking legislation in 1999 has lead to a dramatic decrease in the numbers of women working in prostitution and the numbers of women being trafficked into Sweden (which now currently stands at nil). The Swedish law introduced the notion that prostitutes were victims of male violence, making the purchaser of sex the criminal and the seller of sex the victim. The reasons why these laws work are simple – they criminalise the men that visit prostitutes.

One does wonder why the UK isn't simply following that example. In fact it is what that organization has recommended:

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/prostitutionreform/

To the House of Commons,
The Petition of the undersigned, declares that the current laws on Prostitution in the UK are outdated for the twenty first century. The problems with trafficking in the UK demonstrate how the current laws do not assist in reducing prostitution nor do they help to protect vulnerable women who have been coerced or in many instances forced into prostitution. Although slavery was abolished in the UK almost 200 years ago, slavery still exists for many women in prostitution in the UK. We believe that serious action is now needed to combat this horrific human rights abuse.

The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons reviews the current laws on the supply of sex and prostitution. The undersigned request that new laws are introduced following the bold stance taken by the Swedish government in 1999 which made the demand, rather than the supply illegal. We believe that prostitution is inherently an abuse of women and does not exist to allow women freedom of choice, but is a symptom of the lack of choice for many women. We believe that prostitution will only be reduced in the UK if the demand for prostitutes is tackled in a thorough and comprehensive manner.

[demoleft]

10. "Johns" are currently protected by moral/social attitudes...

...that see sparks of redemption in lost males and unforgivable "scarlet" sinful natures in women.
It was already in the English dramas of the XVIII century - it has been in all our Christian tradition.

And advanced societies still pay their tribute to the link between sex, body and sin/waste that women seem to embody.
So I think the law should try to balance this: it should hit the demand more than the offer.
Which the law in question doesn't mean to do.

[iverglas]

7. and now the reality

http://www.guardian.co.uk/crime/article/0,,2128881,00.html

Reading out adverts from a local paper which promised "new Polish girls ... Romanian ladies ... beautiful girls daily, all nationals", Ms Harman warned: "Britain is a major focus for the global trade of sexual exploitation of women by traffickers who trick or abduct young women and force them into prostitution. We need a consensus on how we should be dealing with the demand side - the fathers, brothers and husbands reading these words and fuelling ... global exploitation."

According to the government, 85% of women in brothels now come from outside the UK, while 10 years ago, 85% were British. But although about 30 men have been prosecuted for trafficking women into Britain to work as prostitutes, no men have yet been prosecuted for paying for sex with women or girls forced into the sex trade.

The former minister Denis MacShane warned recently: "The police and CPS have been woefully inadequate in dealing with the men who create the demand for sex slaves by being willing to pay for sex with trafficked women."

The scum who use prostitutes don't give a shit how the women became available to them -- by choice or not by choice. Permitting the commerce to exist allows unmet demand to provide the incentive for the trafficking.

The proposed approach may not seem wise -- but it is arguable that all elements of the commerce need to be addressed, not just, e.g., the demand for prostitutes or the supply of involuntary prostitutes, if the very serious problem of trafficked women is to be combatted. As long as there is a commerce for them to be trafficked into, the trafficking will continue.

Note to anyone who wishes to reply: if you refrain from the usual moronic commentary about my (or anyone's) sex life, "morality", or purportedly faulty feminist or "liberal" credentials, all of which commentary will be based on complete ignorance or be a total falsehood, or both, you'll save yourself a lot of otherwise completely wasted time and effort. And you won't look like you're trying to intimidate a woman with an opinion you don't like in the same tired, vicious way that intimidation has been attempted against women with opinions some people don't like for centuries.

If anyone wants to discuss the issues, and actually has some knowledge of the issues specifically under discussion ... well hey, that would be a refreshing and welcome change.


(iedited to add paragraph from article inadvertently omitted in my post)

[pop goes the weasel]

11. vaguely interesting

But how does what the Brits do with their vice laws have any bearing on the US?

[demoleft]

12. Vaguely strange question!

DU is a wide community!
And, anyway, the topic is about society, women, gender relations and laws that regulate people's lives.
It's about Democracy, too.
Since the US and its western allies are exporting Democracy to the benefit of the world, let's have a look at how Democracy fares within the limits of the exporting Countries!!

(Not faring that well, it seems...)

[pop goes the weasel]

15. OK

It wasn't at all obvious what you were drawing from this story. Just say so in the first place. And I'd still like you to flesh out what you see as the particular importance of this story. I assume you have some background information or special interest in this topic.

[demoleft]

16. The topic has to do with freedom and justice. Both should be of some interest for a Dem. No more.n/t

[madfloridian]

13. There are a lot of folks at DU from all over the world.

I would think they might think that was a rather interestingly "rude" question. I care a lot about what is going on elsewhere, because ultimately it affects us as human beings as well.

[iverglas]

14. quite apart from the fact

that many people think it wise not to limit their sources of information about approaches to common human/social problems by the geographic source of the information.

In fact, in cases where the only sources that would then be considered are sources within the US, many people might think that particularly unwise.

But then, it's no surprise to hear some people, even here, saying that how people outside the US do things is not worth anybody in the US thinking about. Sad but true.

In the case of this particular problem, the committee of the Canadian Senate that considered it earlier this year examined the Swedish approach and decided to recommend it. Of course, it could also have considered that approach and decided to reject it. Just letting an idea into one's head seldom results in slavish obedience to it. Not letting it in, on the other hand, can result in never getting a clue.