Abolishment Agencies - Supporters of C-36 and inner workings

[squirtingmilf 1982]

I wanted to take some time and go over some details with a few activists before I made this post so you can understand the inner workings of abolishment agencies, those who support and pushed for C-36 to be brought forth. There are two main groups of people that support C-36.

 

As you may have guessed some are run by religious factions and funded by church organizations. I do believe (and this is if my memory serves me correctly) that MP Joy Smith attends a church that supports or funds a Human Trafficking organization and that's how she got involved in the whole pro abolishment issue. When I say religious factions, I'm referring to strong religious beliefs that are anti pretty much everything, extremists.

 

The other group consists of man haters. They blame men for everything, so no real explanation is needed for that and they too are extremists. They get their funding from the government (under a couple of misled idealisms), churches, sexist domestic violence organizations, programs and misleading the public about their organization. One of the largest agencies that runs a "man hating" organization and partook in the hearings is based in Vancouver.

 

 

So this is what they do, they usually troll anti-C36 organizations on news articles, university studies, boards etc, anywhere that is public and they can "refute" claims made by sexworkers. They troll and look for any kind of "disparaging information" on review boards and I know two rather large abolishment agencies that do this on a regular basis. They'll take snippets of information here and there and put it all together and there's their "evidence".

 

So how you talk to and about sp's on review boards and with some people it's not so nice, is taken by them, conflated 10 times worse than what was posted and voila, there's their evidence. Words on review boards, very much matter and although people have the right to express their views, understand you're not dealing with people that "get" someone may say something out of context or because they're having a bad day or week, whatever, it's used against us on an extremist level. And well, again some people are just not so nice to women in general on review boards, we've all seen it at one point or another.

 

This is how they come up with their statistics in a lot of cases; let's say you're a 25 year old service provider and happen to look very young, underage in fact. You will automatically get put on the child trafficking list, they'll go through craigslist, backpage and other ad sites and they will purposely look for ladies that look young. They will then purport that there are X amount of ladies that are child trafficked and pimped (btw in their minds everyone is pimped) but they'll push the agenda more so the younger ladies are pimped and trafficked. If you're a minority and in particular of Asian descent you're a triple whammy.

 

So they take the X amount of young ladies and minorities (one of the bigger agencies that if I recall correctly, did stats for Somaly Mam used this particular method) times that by .39 and this is how they come up with their "guesstimates" of how many "children are being human trafficked" and how many "minorities are being trafficked" .. so understand that they have NO real statistics at all, they are all just guesstimates. Now .39 may not seem like a big number but believe me it turns into a real large number when they're all said and done.

 

Now as you may have guessed if they conflate stats for young women and minorities they surely must conflate their human trafficking stories and you would be right about that. Somaly Mam has been one of the biggest perps where this is concerned (google her, there are literally hundreds of stories about her and the celebrities, news agencies and other media outlets that supported her and her cause, with ZERO research being done into her story).

 

Oprah, Susan Sarandon are just a few of her supporters - ZERO research. She's walked on more red carpets than your A-list celebrity has. And you know what the excuse is for her actions? Who cares if she lied, she saved thousands of women and children. YES, this is the garbage being spewed to our members of parliament based on ZERO FACTUAL evidence.

 

Chong Kim is another big perp in this arena, she made the movie Eden which won several awards at many film festivals and her story is just beginning to unravel by our supporters. Her story was supposedly based on "true" story, which is false. So not only do they lie about stats, they also lie about being human trafficked.

 

I'll post some more information sometime tomorrow, so you get an idea of what we're up against and EVERY effort, petitions, online or off, is a good attempt at getting attention and this is what we need, ATTENTION is a valiant effort, don't disregard it, take action. BUT to truly defeat Bill C-36 in a lot of orgs beliefs is by unraveling truth about how human trafficking is a big fat lie for the most part (it is a problem, don't get me wrong, but conflation is the biggest problem) and how the perpetrators are an even bigger problem.

 

Tomorrow, I'll discuss what really happens to "rescued" victims.

 

Additional Comments:

If you read these articles it will give you a good idea of what I stated above, human trafficking victim fraud is very common and how they lie and conflate the stats, which makes for a nice chunk of change in their pockets.

 

Junk Science - Sex Trafficking Study http://www.sfweekly.com/2011-03-23/news/sex-trafficking-fake-study-womans-funding-network-deborah-richardson-nick-pinto/

 

Myths and Facts about Sex Trafficking during major sporting events

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2014/01/just_in_time_fo.php

 

Somaly Mam foundation closes

http://www.cambodiadaily.com/news/somaly-mam-foundation-closes-down-70300/

 

Somaly Mam's ex-husband blames media

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/asia-pacific/cambodia/140926/cambodia-somaly-mam-Pierre-legros

 

Hollywoods Dangerous Obsession with Human Trafficking

http://www.salon.com/2014/06/10/hollywoods_dangerous_obsession_with_sex_trafficking/

 

Cong Kim- Trafficking Fraud exposed

http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/12/eden-sex-trafficking-fable-falls-apart

 

Trafficking Victim Fraud in Calgary

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/alberta/Australian+woman+centre+false+trafficking+claims+Ireland/10267012/story.html

[fortunateone 156618]

The film Taken was supposed to be based on a true story. Except the story wasn't true.

 

http://www.tbd.com/articles/2011/01/bill-hillar-inspiration-for-film-taken-arrested-by-fbi-47382.html

[roamingguy 300292]

The film Taken was supposed to be based on a true story. Except the story wasn't true.

 

http://www.tbd.com/articles/2011/01/bill-hillar-inspiration-for-film-taken-arrested-by-fbi-47382.html

 

You'd think when someone posts a "resume" listing...well here's what's listed

 

According to the FBI affidavit, Hillar's website, now taken down, claimed extensive experience with the U.S. Army in tactical counter-terrorism, explosive ordnance, emergency medicine, psychological warfare and law enforcement ethics.

Extensive experience in all of these...not to mention a Bachelor's and Doctorate degree...eyebrows should have been raised when anyone claiming experience, well extensive experience in all of these diverse areas.

Maybe he got a book on tape, or a mentor (just a little humour here):icon_rolleyes:

Seriously, while I don't condone or excuse his fraud, some people should have looked at the resume he offered and been just a bit more skeptical, and not taken his claims at face value

Anyhow, my two cents worth

 

RG

[oldblueeyez 15475]

Abolishment...ha ha! They'll have to learn how to abolish the male sex drive first! Yeah, these are dark times for the horny, heterosexual male, but what can a guy do but carry on and take his chances? Maybe we should just not give a fuck like the Bill Murray character in 'St. Vincent', and if we get caught just smile and shrug our shoulders like Benny Hill.

 

I enjoy living alone, I don't need a fucking relationship ever again in my life,

and I don't have the time or motivation (or looks, lol!) to play the pickup game at bars, but I still want my wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am!

 

Fuck the haters! I'm a man and I'm horny, God-damn it! What the fuck did they invent Viagra for, so we could screw our old wives?! I don't think so!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D

 

I could just see myself showing up drunk at John School! lol

[squirtingmilf 1982]

You'd think when someone posts a "resume" listing...well here's what's listed

 

According to the FBI affidavit, Hillar's website, now taken down, claimed extensive experience with the U.S. Army in tactical counter-terrorism, explosive ordnance, emergency medicine, psychological warfare and law enforcement ethics.

Extensive experience in all of these...not to mention a Bachelor's and Doctorate degree...eyebrows should have been raised when anyone claiming experience, well extensive experience in all of these diverse areas.

Maybe he got a book on tape, or a mentor (just a little humour here):icon_rolleyes:

Seriously, while I don't condone or excuse his fraud, some people should have looked at the resume he offered and been just a bit more skeptical, and not taken his claims at face value

Anyhow, my two cents worth

 

RG

 

Yeah you'd think some common sense would be had, but apparently not. Even with Somaly Mam you'd think Oprah's people would've been smart enough to check her out too. And I thought that was a part of a talk show hosts job? To investigate things before airing or endorsing them? At least it used to be. But I do have a comment, how on earth and seriously for how long did this guy seriously think he was going to get away with this scam? How long did any of them think they would get away with it? When it gets high profile, someone's gonna do some digging.

 

This stuff is so common with Human Trafficking and those rescue orgs make a fortune off it.

[tanyathetgurl 857]

I'm cynical and thus a firm believer in justice, not as a theological post-grave construct or a magic-karma thing but as a particular variation of the law of cause-and-effect. This is why I think we'll prevail. In more detail:

 

We affirm our right to make a living using, amongst other things, our bodies ... as part of the interaction with other consenting adults who are within their rights to spend their own money in exchange for our services.

 

Of course, so do actresses, and butchers & bakers & candlestick makers -- but somehow the sexual nature of our work inspires some folks to want to demonize us.

 

Long term and perhaps not just long-term, what gives me hope is that we have truth on our side, i.e., we make our points with honesty as our basic premise. The "other side" seems to be using confusion and obfuscation ... and often blatant dishonesty. That bodes well for us. If anyone had any moral fuzziness on this point, this aspect in and of itself ... it should help clarify things, greatly.

 

I've met Dennis Hof (who runs a number of legal brothels in Nevada) and worked with him over the course of several days, while making a website for one of his business ventures. I learned quite a bit about how he operates. I like how he deals with critics. He invites them, individually, for an all-expenses-paid week-long visit to one of his brothels. The critic (stereotypically, a conservative Christian female reporter or a faux-feminist reporter from the left side of the political spectrum) is not supposed to interfere with business (e.g., go confront clients or ruin the mood) but is welcome to wander around, look around, eat meals with the girls, and ask any questions of anyone and everyone who works there. By the time they leave, they've lost many illusions and the most honest amongst these critics have become convinced that their animosity was misguided.

 

I hasten to add that some of the people who push for criminalization have so dishonest an axe to grind that no amount of reasoning will sway them, but if we can get the word out to the relatively rational voting public, it bodes well.

 

It's time for paraphrase my favourite philosopher, Ayn Rand: on our side of the battle, we have three powerful weapons: rights, reason and reality. Let's use them.

 

.Tanya

 

Additional Comments:

The basic issue is one of rights. We have the right to use our bodies as we're doing. Laws don't change rights; they can at best make some activities illegal. Criminalizing prostitution morally changes nothing. It just makes the law wrong, and puts law enforcement on the side of prosecuting those who aren't doing anything wrong. So, it's an inversion of justice.

 

One of my clients (and also by now, a friend) is a senior retired police officer. Even many years later, he recalls with bitterness and shame the injustice he enacted when he was sent out to arrest service providers. A great many law enforcement officers are basically good people. They signed up in the name of justice, to protect citizens from violent people. They resent being made the enforcers of bad laws.

 

I'm not in Hawaii nor am I a Hawaiian, but still ... Hawaii makes for an interesting case study. The law enforcement officers in Honolulu are very focused on preventing and arresting for violent crime, and by contrast they generally attend to nominally criminalised prostitution (involving consenting adults) with a lack of enthusiasm that I consider to be quite refreshing. Even the formal legal commentary that's on the official Hawaiian law document states (better-worded than I can paraphrase here from memory) that criminalising prostitution makes little sense but when a loud enough portion of the populace pushes for it, such a law ends up being passed and so here it is but don't expect much good to come from it.

 

I hasten to add that whoever chooses to spend his money on a service provider is also within his rights, so I take issue with the Scandinavian model.

 

With all of that clearly in mind, there's one aspect that seems so peculiar that I'm surprised anyone can entertain the notion of criminalising voluntary-exchange prostitution as a serious idea.

 

Let's agree that forced labour + abduction + holding someone against their will (slavery, essentially) is bad, and its eradication deserves of every iota of law enforcement resources we can muster. Were we to criminalise voluntary prostitution then this would divert resources from that just cause. For now let's ignore what the law enforcement officers would be doing as part of enforcing laws that criminalise prostution transactions between consenting adults. Let's say they just lit candles and held hands and sang Kumbaya. Even so it'd be a step backwards because such time and energy could and should have been allocated to going after the people who are, in precise terms, enslaving others.

 

 

(The 90%+10% in my chart might be 80%+20% or 20%+80% instead, but you get the idea).

 

Somehow voluntary sex work gets painted with the same tar brush as sexual slavery, as if the former were essentially the same as the latter. On such premises, agriculture should have been criminalized across the board at the time, because in the American South there were slaves involved in agriculture.

 

The more I think about this proposed law, the less sense it makes.

 

One more thing: One trick that faux-feminists will sometimes pull (and I resent their attempted usurpation of the title "feminist" since I am a true feminist) is a sexist twist on the notion "a hungry man is not free". To the extent that we agree with that premise, it's a slippery-slope argument towards our opponents' point of view. Of course, that critique, even if it held water (which it doesn't) would apply to many fields of endeavour, including the US miltary which, some claim, penalizes poor and/or black people by giving them an option that private industry would not. The "people are victimized even if they're politically free" premise makes a contradictory and jumbled conceptual mess, both north and south of the Canada-US border.

 

.Tanya

[squirtingmilf 1982]

Thanks for the PM Tanya, much appreciated.

 

The one thing that was really irritating to me after I read the bill (a couple of times) was that NOT one media outlet and barely even anyone else for that matter was informing the general public about how this bill was going to affect them.

 

Wherein ANY PERSON can be questioned about their relationship.

 

And if that one little, but major point would've been focused on and pushed all over the place the general public would've been outraged over it. Personally it is of my opinion that this bill really had nothing to do with us, we were used as a means for them to put that piece of law into place.

 

Human trafficking is not about rescue, it's about money and it's a very profitable business to be in. I don't have any stats handy, but I'd be pretty certain in saying it's probably MORE profitable than our industry.

 

Some of the HT orgs, sell their rescued victims to sweatshops or big ags for cheap labour, there's TONS of testimony available about that. And if you can tell a really good story, they hone and train you and put you on the HT speaking circuit, all in the name of telling a great sob story and getting people to donate to their org. So they're exploiting people even further, but it doesn't matter, because you're not being paid for sex.

 

Some of the orgs also have their own items that they make the "victims" provide labour for, I've seen everything from weaving baskets, to bags, book deals, movie deals, you name it. So at the end of the day, who exactly is exploiting who here, really? I can't "exploit" myself willingly, but your org can exploit me into weave some baskets so you can make money from me? I'll take my $260 an hour, wherein I keep ALL of my money, thanks and get to make my own choices.

 

 

Here's an example of what I'm talking about

From Sexworker to Seamstress

[Guest *Ste***cque**]

i thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread and all the contributions.

Thanks!

[squirtingmilf 1982]

one of the most unnerving comments i saw was in an article about forced rescuing sps in Cambodia and then proudly claiming they were training them in sewing work. The unnerving comment from the HT org worker was how they then sell these products. but there is no mention as to whether they pay the 'rescued' who are kidnaped from the brothels and put up into these guarded compounds.

 

 

here is a new article out of Durham, ON.

 

http://www.insidehalton.com/news-story/4942658-durham-police-unit-honoured-for-work-to-free-girls-from-sex-slavery/

 

 

One remark that stands out

 

 

 

One million dollars income, partly based on promoting the necessity of 'rescue' in the sex trade.

 

They don't pay the workers and it's very similar to that video I posted above, where Cambodian HT rescued victims make $80 a month in the clothing factories. Everything is about what they can do for their orgs. BTW FO, if you watched that video I posted The High Cost of Cheap Clothes, you will also find out that the US is Cambodia's "largest investor" in cleaning up "human trafficking" and I'm pretty certain, we're not too far down on that list, since a lot of our clothes are made in third world countries as well.