Author Topic: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week! (Read 7140 times)

victoryrose · « **Reply #15 on:** 04 November 2014, 06:54:47 pm »

I wouldn't be wholly against this if they included an amendment to make it only apply to street prostitutes, but it's pointless because it would be awkward to differentiate and either way THIS IS NOT HOW YOU TRY TO DECREASE PROSTITUTION. Absolutely none of their arguments work with us at all so it shouldn't bloody apply to us!

When will they realise that in the case of street prostitutes, and (some of) those who really are trafficked, and even my own situation, what got us into it was almost directly impacted by the government's stupid austerity-loving-policies and cuts and the conditions we have been placed in as a result. Those of you familiar with my situation will have no difficulty seeing the government's role in it. They were the main factor in this, and now they want to push something that will force me to either be more lenient in my screening or attempt to do incalls in a fucking student house. Ridiculous, it gets worse and worse.

Rosa · « **Reply #16 on:** 04 November 2014, 07:12:15 pm »

Protecting those involved however gives the chance to also protect those who are forced into it - it protects everyone.

Interesting that this is debated on a day when unfair pay is also in the news.

Nia Hope · « **Reply #17 on:** 04 November 2014, 07:13:48 pm »

A lot of pimped street girls are now on adultwork since the clamp down, it is incredibly difficult to define street prostitution these days, this law will make things bad for us and absolutely awful for the pimped girls, x

xw5 · « **Reply #18 on:** 04 November 2014, 07:28:28 pm »

Quote from: victoryrose on 04 November 2014, 06:54:47 pm

I wouldn't be wholly against this if they included an amendment to make it only apply to street prostitutes, but it's pointless because it would be awkward to differentiate and either way THIS IS NOT HOW YOU TRY TO DECREASE PROSTITUTION. Absolutely none of their arguments work with us at all so it shouldn't bloody apply to us

Making other sex workers' lives harder is rarely a good idea for anyone.

Street work is an area where a couple of things - evidence-based drug laws, a compassionate benefits system - would have a huge impact in terms of harm reduction.

Rosa · « **Reply #19 on:** 04 November 2014, 07:31:00 pm »

Quote from: Nia Hope on 04 November 2014, 07:13:48 pm

A lot of pimped street girls are now on adultwork since the clamp down, it is incredibly difficult to define street prostitution these days, this law will make things bad for us and absolutely awful for the pimped girls, x

I'm aware of this but had forgotten about it.

victoryrose · « **Reply #20 on:** 04 November 2014, 07:36:10 pm »

Quote from: xw5 on 04 November 2014, 07:28:28 pm

Quote from: victoryrose on 04 November 2014, 06:54:47 pm
I wouldn't be wholly against this if they included an amendment to make it only apply to street prostitutes, but it's pointless because it would be awkward to differentiate and either way THIS IS NOT HOW YOU TRY TO DECREASE PROSTITUTION. Absolutely none of their arguments work with us at all so it shouldn't bloody apply to us

Making other sex workers' lives harder is rarely a good idea for anyone.

Street work is an area where a couple of things - evidence-based drug laws, a compassionate benefits system - would have a huge impact in terms of harm reduction.

I take my comment about the amendment back. I am 100% behind the last half of your post (I am a Green-supporting liberal hippie who is even in favour of complete drug decriminalization - but that is a story for another day!

) and that's what I was trying to advocate for. My point is that if they provided support instead of thinking these restrictions will work then they'd be in a better place. They simply don't actually know what they're talking about - even I don't as I can't say for sure how it would affect street prostitutes because I'm not one of them which is why I've reconsidered and decide to take that back.

Funnily enough only a matter of months ago I was massively pro-Nordic model, I thought it was awesome and would protect all sex workers everywhere! Ha, until I became one... It's all about perspective.

Nia Hope · « **Reply #21 on:** 04 November 2014, 07:48:43 pm »

A lot of the benefit cuts have forced women into prostitution, I do voluntary work with vulnerable young mums, drug problems etc and the new universal credit they are introducing will make things worse, we have to remember most of us that have the luxury of posting here to share our moans and groans have no idea how some prostitutes live,

I think in a way it's a case of trying to solve an awful problem for some will have a knock on effect on the responsible, inde, tax paying prostitute.

Pimps and traffickers will put ' their girls' in more and more dangerous and horrifying situations if this law is passed and as punters are saying blackmail against them will increase, no good can come from this in my opinion.

alice842 · « **Reply #22 on:** 04 November 2014, 07:56:28 pm »

It was removed from the bill today, so there wasn't even a vote on it in the end

Kay · « **Reply #23 on:** 04 November 2014, 10:05:32 pm »

Ooh, that's great news!

@Nia, I think you're absolutely correct: if things are bad now for trafficked girls, they would only get worse if the work was criminalised.

Nia Hope · « **Reply #24 on:** 05 November 2014, 11:31:51 am »

Not sure if this is a stupid question but I will post it anyway,
If and when this law is passed would that make our earnings difficult to declare? I know we don't have to put on our tax returns that we are prostitutes but it might be difficult to claim for certain things like condoms, lube etc, also would accountants be criminalised doing our accounts?

Hotblondie · « **Reply #25 on:** 05 November 2014, 11:57:58 am »

I dont think that bill will ever be put to a vote.
As far as Ive noticed, the direction is to make escorting a safe and easier for escorts job, I think in not that far future working in pairs for safety will be allowed too.
Just my opinion and I really hope Im not wrong.

xw5 · « **Reply #26 on:** 05 November 2014, 02:53:31 pm »

The final bit of the debate:

Crispin Blunt: I shall take the remaining minute and a half simply to make the point that the authoritarian, moralistic and un-evidenced potential catastrophe that presents itself as new clause 6 must be opposed. In proposing these provisions, the hon. Member for Slough (Fiona Mactaggart) complained about the fact that she got on television programmes and then found that her statistics were under dispute. That is hardly surprising, because all the academic evidence is on the other side of the argument.

Fiona Mactaggart: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Crispin Blunt: No, I will not. It takes the scion of a couple of baronetcies with the education of Cheltenham Ladies? college to produce such a moralistic sense that can define sex work as exploitation?without ever having listened to the sex workers themselves. It is a pity, given the trouble the hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) took to draw attention to this group of people, that the hon. Lady did not take the trouble to listen to them. Had she done so, I cannot believe that she would have come to this view because the unintended consequence of her proposal would be to put the people whom she is trying to help in peril. That is a serious mistake.

.. and it was defeated.

publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmhansrd/cm141104/debtext/141104-0004.htm

Nia Hope · « **Reply #27 on:** 05 November 2014, 03:11:21 pm »

Quote from: xw5 on 05 November 2014, 02:53:31 pm

The final bit of the debate:

Crispin Blunt: I shall take the remaining minute and a half simply to make the point that the authoritarian, moralistic and un-evidenced potential catastrophe that presents itself as new clause 6 must be opposed. In proposing these provisions, the hon. Member for Slough (Fiona Mactaggart) complained about the fact that she got on television programmes and then found that her statistics were under dispute. That is hardly surprising, because all the academic evidence is on the other side of the argument.

Fiona Mactaggart: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

Crispin Blunt: No, I will not. It takes the scion of a couple of baronetcies with the education of Cheltenham Ladies? college to produce such a moralistic sense that can define sex work as exploitation?without ever having listened to the sex workers themselves. It is a pity, given the trouble the hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) took to draw attention to this group of people, that the hon. Lady did not take the trouble to listen to them. Had she done so, I cannot believe that she would have come to this view because the unintended consequence of her proposal would be to put the people whom she is trying to help in peril. That is a serious mistake.

.. and it was defeated.

publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmhansrd/cm141104/debtext/141104-0004.htm

Well that is refreshing to hear, I'm sure Fiona McTaggert will imply that a man would make comments like that! Love the reference to Cheltenham ladies too.

Kay · « **Reply #28 on:** 05 November 2014, 03:58:30 pm »

A sensible, reasonable Tory - I'm pleasantly surprised! Good old Crispin...

glitterfeminism · « **Reply #29 on:** 05 November 2014, 06:00:20 pm »

WE WON. IT WAS BEAUTIFUL. I'm sure the sex worker breakfast this morning in London was a lot of fun (as always sad I can't go). Such a weight off my shoulders now. Lots of people did incredible work on this and I'm so relieved. I also love John McDonnell a ridiculous amount considering he's another old white man haha.

See also the main SAAFE.info site for more Support And Advice For Escorts

Author Topic: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week! (Read 7140 times)

victoryrose

Re: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week!

Rosa

Re: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week!

Nia Hope

Re: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week!

xw5

Re: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week!

Rosa

Re: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week!

victoryrose

Re: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week!

Nia Hope

Re: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week!

alice842

Re: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week!

Kay

Re: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week!

Nia Hope

Re: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week!

Hotblondie

Re: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week!

xw5

Re: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week!

Nia Hope

Re: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week!

Kay

Re: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week!

glitterfeminism

Re: Urgent: UK MPs trying to criminalise clients next week!