Craigslist eny west brothel

craigslist eny west brothel

This time, it was a tall black man wearing an ill-fitting suit and tie, like thrift-shop formalwear. He, too, emerged from the bathroom and disappeared into her room, and after an hour or so she escorted him to the door, again in the blue pumps and rumpled ivory dress. I took to Google: What to do if my roommate is a prostitute?

More than what to do , I was seeking clarity on why it bothered me. Who was I to judge if Jenny chose an unorthodox profession? Why would I care if she used her room to ply her trade? On Yahoo Answers and in Google Groups and various other forums people wrote about similar experiences, and the consensus was: I wondered about the practical aspects of her work: Does she have a Backpage ad?

Did she use Craigslist? Could I find her on The Erotic Review? Sit her down for a talk. Point her in the right direction. Instead, when we met in the kitchen the next afternoon, passing between the refrigerator and the trashcan by the sink, I decided to bring it up.

I was washing a dish, the water running lightly, and she was behind me, waiting for something in the microwave. She turned slowly to face me, nonchalant, with a thin smile. What are you going to do about it? She offered no further explanations, and we both retreated to our rooms. Let us, as adults, discuss this situation. In return, she took me for a fool. The words infuriated me, and I began to plot her eviction. Several days passed, however, and still I did nothing.

We had just finished dinner at a SoHo restaurant, paid the check, and were about to head to her place when my phone rang. It was my landlord. There was trouble at the apartment. My thoughts went to the men. My date raised an eyebrow to me. We were outside the restaurant, in the cool night air on a quiet street, a jittery yellow cab passing over the uneven cobblestone. Landlord says someone called The response came a few seconds later. I stared at that text, uncomprehending.

She had been dead, in fact, for the past twenty-four hours, in her bed, in our apartment. My thoughts in those moments would later seem incongruous with the event itself, but at the time they were automatic, a cascading stream of impolitic ponderings. I hung up the phone and looked at my date, who was gripping my arm and staring.

My date reacted as I expected. Of course I was O. Mostly I was just annoyed that her death was getting in the way of my evening plans. Jenny and I had lived together for four months, but I barely knew her. An overdose of what? I called my landlord, and told her what I had learned: No, she need not worry about a thing.

The police will take care of it all. I was out of town, I said — not a lie, although not entirely the truth either. My date gripped my arm tighter, as if the news of death created some erotic charge, at once frightening and gripping, and we went off together to her apartment a few blocks away.

In the morning I took the subway home, and remembered: My roommate was dead. It felt surreal, and I found myself ruminating on the nature of death, and youth, and the way we often know so little about the people living just several feet away from us. It appeared that someone had taken the cat. Later in the afternoon, my phone rang. I felt momentarily caught off balance. She had seemed like a rootless child, unattached, unaffected. I knew she had parents, a little sister, extended family somewhere, but I knew so little about them they were almost unreal to me.

Her entire life seemed confined to her room across the hallway, as if she mattered to no one but herself. I am so, so terribly sorry. This must be so devastating. I could hear him sniffling on the other end of the line. There were the signs, of course. It was heroin, Steve told me. Her boyfriend, who was an addict, had introduced it to her.

When I hung up, I felt guilty for feeling as unmoved as I did. Her father, at the same time, seemed to expect exactly that. As if he knew that someone like me would be affected only by the trouble of it all. Here were people reminiscing about her, friends writing about the time she helped someone with a college essay, or about high school adventures, or that time they got passed-out drunk and high on that crazy spring break trip.

Two days later, her aunt came. She packed some of her clothes into a few large trash bags. The bed that was ordered online just four months ago. The easy chair Jenny had brought from her childhood home in Westchester. A bunch of keys on a key ring, a bracelet of blue beads, a MetroCard, a bag of cosmetics.

It looked just like it had before she moved in: I closed the door to look behind it, and noticed a taped-up card, from HashtagThePlanet. I thought about how our physical possessions are like phantom lives: It made me sad, but I had little use for the rest, and ended up putting most of it out with the trash.

The stuff sat on the edge of the sidewalk for a day or two, and through the window I watched as people passed, glancing at the items. Some stopped to pick through them, holding up items for inspection, taking what they pleased, until the pile was about half the original size. Then the trash collectors came and tossed it all into the monster-mouth of their truck, until nothing was left but a shattered light bulb that slipped out of one of the bags, now spread in tiny bits of glass among the fallen leaves of a nearby honeysuckle tree.

We humans are far more complex than the news headlines and clickbait would have you believe. Let the Narratively newsletter be your guide. Two decades after NYC sought to relocate its infamous tunnel-dwelling denizens, a years-long investigation reveals a few hardy souls still toiling and thriving beneath the city.

The mouth of the tunnel is wide and dark, swallowing the light and all that breathes. Rubble is scattered along the train tracks, bordered by retaining walls covered in numerous layers of graffiti.

This is where it all started. Here by the parkway with the blasting trucks and the roaring cars, near the filigree arches of the Riverside Drive viaduct, here with the gravel crunching under my feet as I run down the railroad into this hollow mouth. This is where they live, deep into the depths of the city, way underground, lying in the dirt.

Sure, you know about them. Of course you know about them. Here in the tunnels. Their eyes have adapted to the constant night that cloaks them from the topside world. And one day they will spill outside and burn us all alive, and they will reign over our flatscreen joys and our organic delights. The lost ones, the hidden ones. The broken and the ill, the wandering, the gone. Jon has been homeless for more than fifteen years.

Like many of the people interviewed for this article, he did not want to give his full name. He has been living here for a while now, in a small space between two support beams that can only be reached with a ladder. A plywood roof protects his hoarded belongings from seeping water. The place is crammed full. There is an old mattress on the floor, and cookware, blankets and electronics stacked on makeshift shelves. Jon says he did prison time. He is bipolar and suffers from major substance dependence.

He used to be a gang member in the Bronx. He used to be a family man until he got disowned. He was a furniture salesman. The FBI is looking for him. He used to know Donald Trump. His real story has been buried long ago under thick layers of improvised memories that grew more detailed by the years, the man slowly becoming a collage of himself. Today is a good day for Jon, despite the rain and the cool weather. It makes them feel alive.

Like alligators in the sewers. Jon offers me a sip of vodka. He tells me to stay safe and to watch out for trains when I go back walking into the tunnel. I hear him talk to himself as I go away from the entrance and from the white sky. The smell down here is the one of brake dust and mold. I can see rats scouring for food and drinking from brown puddles in the tracks ballast.

The city growls over my head — a distant growl muffled by the concrete, almost a snarl, like something cold and foul spreading over the long stretches of stained walls, like a dark and wild beast curling up around me and breathing on my neck.

A dark and wild beast silently trailing me. Stories about underground dwellers were already flourishing when the first New York City subway line opened in The expansion of extensive sewers and steam pipes systems had brought a newfound fascination with what laid below the streets. But it was only in the s that the first widespread depictions of real-world tunnel residents appeared in New York. A New York Times article by John Tierney was the earliest to outline the phenomenon, looking at people living in an abandoned train tunnel beneath Riverside Park, along the banks of the Hudson River.

Collective imagination took over quickly. An instant hit, it chronicled the organization of those underground societies, describing compounds of several thousands where babies were born and regular lives were lived, with elected officials, hot water and even electricity. However, the book was promptly criticized for its inconsistencies. A article by Cecil Adams further demonstrated that many accounts were perhaps more sensationalism than truth.

Still, while the essay might have been inflated or romanticized, it was nonetheless true that the homeless begging in the streets of New York were merely the tip of the iceberg. This period is gone. That they spoke their own language. Creepy stuff, straight out of a horror movie… Most was made-up. I personally never witnessed unusual stuff. Written in an abandoned crew room of the F subway line, these words were the reason I ventured into the tunnels in the first place, looking for the invisible, guided by local dwellers along the years to seek foundations of humanity in the foundations of the city.

All the stories I had read about the Mole People before descending myself had two things in common. They all showed simple human beings who were in no way comparable to the legends that had been told, and they all included a man named Bernard Isaac.

I met Bernard Isaac for the first time in A place to find peace and take a break from the chaos. Isaac was at the very center of the Mole People legend.

His BA in journalism and his studies in philosophy had somehow led him to work as a model, then as a TV crew member, then as a tour guide in the Caribbean where he began smuggling cocaine to the States.

The father of two sons with two different women, he never cared much for family life, preferring to spend his smuggling profits on parties thrown at his Upper West Side penthouse.

Soon he was broke, friendless and on his own. By the late s, he was sleeping in the Riverside Park tunnel. The tunnel was known by homeless people since its inception in the s, when it was used by trains to bring cattle to the city before the freight operations ended. Its population, limited at first to about three or four individuals, quickly grew at the time Isaac settled in, evolving into small tribes of vagrants who built thriving shantytowns in the newly abandoned space.

Few risked getting down into the tunnel. But those who did go down called it home, and it became a haven for the destitute to unwind without fear of getting arrested or attacked like people on the streets often were.

One day, three men asked Isaac for a toll as he came by the th Street entrance to the tunnel. Soon interest came from all around the world. In the encampment, the dwellers had a familiar place to be, watch TV, read or smoke. Rules were simple but strictly enforced.

Some, like Isaac, were at home in the darkness, and would not have lived anywhere else. Most who lived here did not consider themselves homeless. As word spread of the tunnel, a growing number of graffiti artists came to paint the seemingly endless walls that flanked the train tracks. We dared to be ourselves. Some residents were still eager to leave, only to come back later. Another who attempted to go to the surface was Bob Kalinski, a speed addict known as the fastest cook east of the Mississippi, who could fry twenty eggs at a time when on amphetamines.

A heart attack forced him to try his luck with the public housing system in He too returned in the following months. The sense of belonging simply was too strong.

The tunnel was a better place for him to be alone in freedom. I keep walking along the tracks. Jon must have passed out drunk, now, somewhere behind me.

Every noise is threatening in the tunnel, and I find myself constantly looking over my shoulder, ready to face something too awful to name. Was that a train I heard? The metallic vibration of a dragged chain? It smells like death here. The pungent stench of rotting meat. The smell of death all over now. Are those eyes glowing nearby? I lean against the wall and try to breathe calmly, reminding myself this place is only populated by old memories and the occasional homeless person looking for a safe place to be.

The rumbling feels closer. I see rats scurrying by, racing into the obscurity. Then I see the charred remains of an animal in the corner of an alcove — a raccoon maybe, a big rodent with liquefied flesh, burnt fur and missing limbs.

I walk away holding my breath. The ground is littered with discarded books and magazines. A broken crack pipe has been left on a cinder block.

There is a garden chair, and overturned crates and buckets. A mangled teddy bear. His clothes are spotless, regularly washed at a nearby laundromat. Maybe talk to some people. An ex-girlfriend and a kid. He rents an apartment from a friend when his kid comes to visit, a clean studio in a gray Washington Heights building. I nod and he goes into an abandoned service room, returning with two mugs.

I hurt a lot of people. I collect cans, it keeps me busy. I do it all week long. The coffee is nice and strong. The streets are full of opportunities if you know where to look.

I deal with what I have. The worsening quality of the local drugs means accidents are now more frequent than ever, with overdose-related deaths in In the buildings he helps maintain, he occasionally sells the tenants K2 — a form of synthetic marijuana that recently boomed across the city, especially in East Harlem where a homeless encampment was recently dismantled. This is who I am.

We both eat in silence. The incentives paid by the Department of Homeless Services to landlords renting out shelter units far exceed the ones given for providing tenants with permanent single room occupancy lodging. In , the average stay was days at the Freedom House , a homeless shelter on West 95th Street managed by private company Aguila Inc. Conditions are appalling inside the Freedom House. Garbage piles up in the courtyard for rodents to feed on. Sometimes a TV is hurled out a window , or the police close the street after someone is stabbed in a fight.

The NYPD regularly raids the place looking for people with outstanding warrants, targeting domestic abusers and failing to arrest the major dealers or car thieves roaming the area. The year-old knows enough about shelters. She will never go back.

She was sixteen when she got pregnant with her daughter Alyssa. Jessica was then diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder and admitted to transitional housing in Brooklyn. She says that within a month, social services was badgering her to place her three-year-old in foster care. I called my sister and begged her to take care of Alyssa until I found a place of my own. But it was the right thing to do.

At least she is with family. When she grows up I will explain it all to her. She looks away, tears rolling down her face. Once her daughter was in the hands of her sister, Jessica was sent to the Freedom House where she stayed for seven months until Aguila notified her of her imminent relocation. She began sleeping in a subway tunnel after transit authorities made her leave her spot in the Herald Square station corridor on 34th Street, dragging her by her feet when she refused to stand up from her mat.

She spent about two months living in a recess by the subway tracks of a Midtown station, protected from the elements and from harassment. She wrote a long letter to her daughter there. She never sent it. I miss you everyday. I love you so much. Soon she will give them to her daughter. Trash as far as the eye can see. Brooklyn might be the oldest resident of the Riverside Park tunnel. Now fifty-four, she has been living here since , when she discovered the place by following feral cats.

Like Bernard Isaac, she appeared in various films and documentaries. She has perfected her story for journalists along the years.

Everything she relates is recited like a school lesson. Her stint in the Marines. The death of her parents and the loss of her family house. The kids lighting her cardboard shack on fire in the park. Her boyfriend BK and their issues. The food bowls left at her door for the forty-nine cats she feeds.

She is a tough woman who speaks her mind, and she has the unyielding attitude of someone who has trudged through life. Her bandana and dreadlocks make her look younger than she is. That would be nice. The stew is surprisingly tasty. You never get used to it. After she finishes eating, Brooklyn shows me a pile of recycling bags filled with countless Poland Spring water bottles collected at a nearby bodega. Brooklyn is disappointed when I tell her I have to go.

She calls one of her cats as I keep walking to the south end of the tunnel. The whole place feels like a grave. A cathedral for the dead and the fallen. Nothing is left from the former shacks. Even the smallest pieces of debris are gone. A raw, burning power that some, like Isaac, will seek their whole life. Sane immediately sprayed the quote on the wall. A train rushes by, almost silent with its unbearably bright lights, the air swelling around me as the cars dash past.

This place is not for anyone to be , I think. I wait for dreams to come. Sleeping in the tunnel is an alien experience, but the sight of rain falling down the ventilation grates and streaking the chiaroscuro light is worth it alone, definite proof that poetry can endure anywhere. This is the final byproduct of the city. This is a dark and wild beast inviting you to come closer because nothing will ever be all right, but she will always be at your side to keep you warm.

Amtrak Police Captain Doris Comb started calling for more enforcement, effectively pushing the homeless out of the active railway. Different times were looming ahead.

They feel rejected and decline assistance. Bernard Isaac still held a grudge against Comb eighteen years later, for having seized the universal key to the exit gates an Amtrak employee had given him. Some flatly refused to cooperate and gave up all hope of being granted Section 8 apartments. Margaret Morton would later write in a New York Times article that this solution had been by far the most economical for the city.

As the photojournalist Teun Voeten would discover in , some of the former squatters later achieved normal lives again. There would even be success stories.

Then there were the others. One would commit suicide, sitting in front of a running train. Another was found dead in his apartment. Another succumbed to AIDS. Bernard Isaac passed away in late , closing a chapter of an old New York legend. His ashes were sprinkled across a creek in his native Florida. The legend was gone, but homelessness was more real than ever. According to Coalition for the Homeless, between 58, and 60, persons slept in NYC municipal shelters every month of , an all-time record since the Great Depression, with numbers increasing for the sixth consecutive year.

There were 42, homeless children across the five boroughs in Everything else becomes a symptom. The cause is lack of affordable housing. The median Manhattan rent jumped more than seven percent in August compared to the same period in , while affordable housing placements fell sixty percent between and At the time of his declaration, only five people had been found living in the Riverside Park tunnel, but a different community was already growing on a nearby dead-end street dubbed the Batcave.

His Goya reproduction has been damaged by water. In a few years from now, it will be completely gone, washed away by the elements. Morning light is different in the tunnel — colder maybe, and whiter, casting long straight beams onto the rails. Wind gusts make dust rise up in whirlpools. A blue jay flies past a grate.

I wake up and New York slowly comes to life. Carlos lives holed up in an old sewer pipe of about six feet high by five feet wide near the south entrance to the Riverside Park tunnel. He is one of the few original dwellers who stayed. His house is small but very practical, entirely concealed by a metal lid he takes great care of pulling on every time he gets inside. His electricity is tapped from an outlet further down the tunnel, allowing him to store his food in a refrigerator and have heat during winter.

I read a lot. All kinds of books. I read them and I sell them. The increased police patrols make his life less simple than it was a few years ago, but he keeps an upbeat attitude about it. Sometimes they try to make me leave. Carlos shows me where a decomposing body was found by Amtrak workers in , months after taggers had discovered it. Two femurs bundled in cargo pants, neatly laid into an old child stroller, with pieces of leathered skin still attached to them, and a skull standing on top of a nearby pole.

We find the old man sleeping on a couch behind a safety wall. Inside, a sentence is underlined in blue ink. We stay a moment at his side before I finally leave the tunnel, emerging from the wet ground behind a grove of trees. The streets seem slower than usual. Hurt just makes us hurt. And hurt lives in the land of the lost, and unites them in missing love and broken homes, for five cents a can, cans per day.

The few Mole People left today survive in hurt. They are relics of a New York that was, and witnesses of a world so estranged that nobody truly remembers it anymore. Most are too late for the topside life. How easy it would be to go away and never come back. But this is their city. This is their home.

These are their minds wandering and their time slipping. Their hopes and their thirsts until the sun goes down. Away — to a place made of birches and wet leaves and blue afternoons and muddy clothes, a place where dark days would be foreign — a place for them and all the unseen, warm as liquor, where hurt would be sweet and love would be real.

Seventy-five years later, its gay stars are finally opening up. The hotel was likely decorated with muted colors in the modernist style of the previous decade. All available supplies needed to go toward the war effort.

The story was similar in baseball. With most of the Major League Baseball players deployed, executives decided to fill the gap with female players, paving the way for the A. When she told the story later in her life, she gave the reason: In Their Own League.

Players had to attend charm school and wear lipstick on the field. Their uniforms had skirts instead of pants — not great for sliding, but deemed appropriately feminine by league owner Philip K. Though it was never explicitly stated, historians and players alike say the rules were in place, in part, to prevent the women from being perceived as lesbians.

Donahue was in Nova Scotia for the winter when she met Henschel, who was 19 at the time. The two women hit it off, keeping in touch when Donahue moved back to the U. The next day was her birthday. For seven decades the two told almost everyone, aside from their inner circle, that they were best friends.

For 70 years theirs has been a love story, originating in a time when the only love stories we were allowed to tell were those between a man and a woman. Try to ask most former players about the issue and they clam up. The players could have lost more than just their baseball careers if they had been open about their queerness.

They could have lost their families, occupations, and reputations, too. That stigma has carried on for decades. She was the first to start an N. She then played for the independent, otherwise all-male St. Paul Saints and Duluth-Superior Dukes.

Indeed, that same year, the book SportsDykes: Stories From On and Off the Field was also published. She understands today that talking about being a gay athlete is a double-edged sword, in a way. But this stereotype existed long before Borders was even born. Cahn in her book Coming on Strong: Gender and Sexuality in Twentieth Century Sports. It was this perception of female athletes as unfeminine and unfeminine women as lesbians that led Wrigley, a chewing gum manufacturer and president of the Chicago Cubs, to insist that his players be appropriately feminine in appearance.

When the affair was between teammates, chaperones would refuse to let the suspected couple room together and gauge the reaction of the players to confirm their hunch. In one case, the suspected lovers were so angry about being barred from becoming roommates that team manager Johnny Gottselig considered it proof of the affair.

In another case, a married player was rumored to have fallen for one of her teammates. Another time, Leo said that a married player was discovered to be in a relationship with a woman who was unassociated with the league. Leo claimed he notified her husband, who came and took her home. However, many of the players came to the league quite sheltered. They often arrived from small towns or rural areas and were quite young when they left home.

As a result, it was not uncommon for new or younger players to be completely blindsided by the relationships between their teammates. Dorothy Hunter entered the League in , when she was Well, I just thought they were giving me the gears because I was a green Canadian.

But many of the players were unattached. If straight players were married, many of their husbands were off at war or were left back at home on farms or in factories. It was in many ways the perfect environment for gay women to become involved with each other.

But in some cases, the near-inability to date was a welcome reality. It made staying in the closet easier, because there was no time for dating and so there was no need to make excuses. This was something that Borders discovered, too, when she was playing ball in the s. These restrictions kept some women out of the league altogether. One of those women was Dot Wilkinson, often regarded as the greatest softball player of her time — and perhaps all time.

Wilkinson was a hard-playing catcher for the Phoenix Ramblers. She joined the American Softball Association A. I never thought about anything else.

Wilkinson was recruited to play in the A. But it was more than that. She also knew that the league was actively discouraging players from being perceived as exactly what Wilkinson was — gay. But she had another love, too. Wilkinson and Caito played together for two seasons, until the A. I t is the obituaries that offer the most publicly available clues to some of the players who spent their lives with other women.

The most telling evidence is often in veiled language or titles that are open to interpretation. She attended the mass tryout at Wrigley Field, becoming one of the original members of the league in During the season, she was traded to the Kenosha Comets. Her contract was not renewed in , forcing her to try out again. After leaving the league, she became a physical education teacher. She is rumored to have impressed Babe Ruth with how far she could hit a softball, and it is said he squeezed the biceps on her arm when he posed with her for a photo.

In the Brooklyn Dodgers invited Deegan and two other women to their spring training camp. If she were a man, she no doubt would have been a Dodger. Deegan died of breast cancer in at the age of The two shared their passion for softball: Nusse passed away just six months after Deegan died, at age She was the first chairperson of the Players Association Board and two-time A.

One of the best pitchers to ever play in the A. The girl from Rockford, Illinois, played 10 seasons in the league. In that time she threw three no hitters, had three win seasons, and had an unassisted triple play — something that has only happened 15 times in Major League Baseball since Cione spent her rookie year in with the Rockford Peaches and finished with an astonishing 1.

It was a treat to watch a game with her. She analyzed every play. Catcher Eunice Taylor and her partner of 45 years, Diana Walega, owned and operated a pet supply store for 40 years.

Their obituaries, which are historical documents, offer us glimpses into their lives and are open for us to interpret. In their younger days, they look like they could be sisters as they pose in front of a Christmas tree in a picture that might have been taken in the s.

They each sport short, dark hairstyles and wear sleeveless turtleneck shirts. In another, they are perhaps in their 60s and they dance together in front of a fireplace. They are both laughing. Their hairstyles have not changed in the decades between the two photos except to turn from brown to gray. They are ready to tell the world the truth about their relationship.

And now you'll have the "innocent" john sorting through ads selling any number of illegal offerings, because he will have to use the TOR version now. Can't help but think this will be a boon for those in the business of sex trafficking.

Would it be surprising to say that trading in this might include Bitcoin? Monero is the de facto standard currency in the deep web nowadays, not bitcoin. TeMPOraL 3 months ago. About as surprising as noticing that e. I'd imagine they would use Monero or Zcash nowadays since those are proven fairly more anonymized.

Bitcoin is wholly public so all it takes is one identifiable wallet to start profiling addresses they interact with.

You used to be able to tumble the bitcoins but cant realistically do it anymore due to high fees. By Bitcoin I meant Blockchain based money.

But I couldn't edit it later on. Unless they send you suitcase with human being and they don't expect them to get back with cash, then yes, it would be surprising. But if people are content to swat away a problem until they can't see it anymore, despite that the ignored causes continues to generate more misery, then it's hard to be sympathetic to that defensible position.

Especially since a lot of people just lost access to romantic venues because a minority of users make a living through sex. Or that particular sites enable it? I think the point is: Bartweiss 3 months ago. Perhaps more directly - if we're trying to stop sex trafficking by shutting down the places where victims meet clients, we're going to have to ban streets. Fjolsvith 3 months ago. Or why can't we ban churches because pastors can use them to rape or molest church members?

Most monetary transactions involving victims of sex slaves involve money, should we remove it too? He's saying that this affects far more legitimate users than sex traffickers by multiple orders of magnitude, while at the same time not preventing sex trafficking from taking place anyway.

No, no, we don't ban money, we just move to systems where the government gets to monitor all your financial transactions in real time and they get to selectively block those they don't find morally wholesome. End Prohibition of Sex Work Step 2. Stop Criminalizing Speech driving to further and further under ground were it is no longer tracable at all The "scorched earth" groups are in no way protecting victims, in fact they are making it WORSE by driving people to more shady platforms deep deep under ground, where law enforcement will be less likely to find information or victims.

End Prohibition of Sex Work All you have to do is study the laws of prostitution elsewhere in the world to understand that they have little to no influence on sex trafficking. Prostitution is legal, explicit, and even taxed in the Netherlands, but sex trafficking remains such a major problem that some large cities, like Utrecht, have outlawed prostitution locally to combat the issue.

It may not end sex trafficking but legalising prostitution lowers harm levels on workers, but allowing them to seek medical care and police protection without risk of incarceration. There is no down-side to legalisation as many would say for drugs, as it allows problems to have legal solutions. I'm not in disagreement with you about legalization of prostitution in general, but with regards specifically to sex trafficking, there is much evidence from several countries that legalization actually makes sex trafficking worse -- most likely due to increased demand for a service anyone can enjoy legally.

Could you cite some of this evidence? The issue comes up quite often in the local papers here in the Netherlands. Some other commenters here have pointed to some other reports from other countries.

You get those same benefits if you keep buying sex illegal but decriminalise selling. Some workers of the business in the Netherlands argue that the end of prohibition worsened conditions.

Prostitution in the Netherlands and Drugs in Portugal seem to be the main ones. I assume things got worse because cowardly assholes are now allowed to treat the prostitutes disrespectfully. Before, the assholes that were afraid of the law wouldn't risk going to a prostitute. Now that the law won't hurt them, they go and are demanding disrespectful assholes. Implying that there is some uptick in people who are "allowed to treat the prostitutes disrespectfully" in well-regulated societies is intellectually disingenuous.

HelloNurse 3 months ago. Abuse in a brothel involves an idiot, a prostitute and a lot of other people possibly including bouncers , while abuse of a street walker involves only an idiot, a prostitute and a lonely place. Guess what's easier to perpetrate, regardless of legality.

The likelihood of customers that [would] make derogatory comments post encounter goes up. While the ratio is the same the hard number of negative feedback is 3 times greater. And psychologically negative feedback has much more weight that positive feedback which can weigh on an person's self-confidence and feeling of self-worth. Thank you for the reply and insight. My point is, there are more people now openly able and willing to approach prostitutes who think "shut up and do what I say because I'm paying you [you low life worthless being who has to sell you body to make a living]".

I'm not saying all people who use or are okay with prostitution think this, just that the supply of people who think this and act this way now find themselves able to openly go to prostitutes where as the law, and fear of it, kept these assholes from using prostitutes before.

What does this have to do with the discussion at hand? If your point is that some percentage of people are assholes who look down on others and that more people means more assholes overall, then this is already well understood.

How this clarifies the topic at hand or in any way furthers the discussion is missing. Someone said they heard legalization made conditions worse. I was merely offering up an opinion of why that might be, if true. Where are "closet" rude and mean people more likely to make degrading and derogatory comments? In public in front of others where their socially unacceptable behavior food service employees would be exposed?

Or behind closed doors with a single individual where they can freely say shit making the other feel small and themselves feel big? Sorry, I forgot anecdotes, metaphors, and hypotheses are not allowed on HN. I'm truly sorry I wasn't able to effectively and clearly communicate how the dots connect.

Noos 3 months ago. It got worse because no one wants to be a prostitute, and there has always been a strong coercive element to women entering that profession. When you legalize, you increase demand while the supply is still capped, so coercion rises to compensate. So the same "coercive element" could be said and has been said to drive people to enter any field of employment making all work for wages "coercive" by nature.

Where does the coercion appear? Thank you for replying. I'm sure you want the police and laws there to protect children from sexual exploitation. The same with drugs, you don't want smack and cocaine being sold in Boots. So there has to be a law, and that law is going to be too restrictive for some people and too lenient for others. The laws and implementation of them swings back and forth all throughout time.

We protect children from all manner of things because their brains have not formed to the point where we as a society believe they can make rational choices for themselves However if we are going to have a free society at some point you become an adult, at which point I do not believe the government should act as a parent over your life making choices as to what is "best" for you Allowing for that type of government means you lose self agency and your liberty.

Not sure what a boot is, in American English a boot is a type of shoe, I dont really know if I care that people sell drugs out of their shoes Aside from that, Yes I believe "smack", cocaine, and every other drug should be legal to sell to adults. The government has not business telling an adult what food, drink or drugs they are allowed or not allowed to take. At most the government has an responsibility to enforce quality, and truthful advertisement laws i. In fact, Boots is now owned by Walgreens.

It's official company name now is Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc but it's Walgreens who bought all the shares of Boots. I believe 'the boot' is a British term for the trunk of an automobile, which I think fits the bill here: The context is the British pharmacy "Boots" - think Walgreens.

The parent commenter's argument is that our society at large does not want heroin and coke sold at the corner drugstore. They want these substances out of sight, out of mind. It's all very well for us to imagine legalized drugs would be safer and more easy to regulate, but a majority of people disagree - so for the time being, they will continue being sold out of the boots of cars. TheGrassyKnoll 3 months ago. Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc. Taxed and regulated the same as alcohol and tobacco.

Start by legalizing prostitution and removing the black market. That won't end all trafficking, but will end a lot and will make it much easier to go after the remaining illegal black market as it's now been separated from the legal market. Comment about how people who don't learn are doomed to repeat history here. How many black markets for harmless everyday goods and services do we need to ban before the idiots in charge start to understand these simple principles? They're constantly talking about markets, but clearly no one in government understands the first thing about them.

Or, more likely, doesn't want to. It's much easier to hide illegally activity that mirrors legal activity than it is to hide illegal activity where all the surrounding paraphernalia is direct evidence.

Your assertion that legalisation of prostitution will lead to less trafficking of people seems naive to me - you create a larger market and allow people to easily hide. You bring forth a compelling theory, but I don't think it's true.

Compare the market for contraband or counterfeited booze and cigarettes, which "mirrors" legal booze and cigarettes, with the market for cocaine and heroin, where "all the surrounding paraphernalia is direct evidence".

OK, go on, if someone is smoking an illegally imported cigarette it's nearly impossible to tell just by looking that there's been a crime. If they're doing a line you know within a small error margin without any investigation.

Why, because the former is hidden by the legally allowed behaviour. No, you can't tell if a given cigarette being smoked is contraband or not, but buying a pack of smuggled cigarettes is a very different experience from buying a legal pack.

Even a conscientious customer has very few options to check for themselves. If brothels on the other hand are legal, operators have every incentive to do this, and if anyone is looking for an illegal brothel which looks very different from a legal one, just like the place you're buying smuggled smokes looks very different from a , this "paraphernalia" is direct evidence that they're looking for something bad. Sure, but the question is about the relative sizes of the markets and the amount of involuntary suffering involved.

While I admittedly did not look up any hard data, I take it for granted that the cocaine market is much more of a public problem than the smuggled cigarette market. This flies in the face of your admittedly compelling thought experiment.

Siblings have made some compelling points regarding why that might be. Legal cigarettes cap the profits that can be had from illegal cigarette trade. With cocaine, you can charge x production costs. This creates incentives that are sure to produce an endless supply of dealers, regardless of how draconian enforcement is. It would probably also create a boom in prostitution - with the accompanying drawbacks. Job Cohen, the former mayor of Amsterdam lamented in crime organizations and human traffickers taking advantage of their lax prostitution laws.

You know that you can have consensual sexual relationships outside of marriage, right? They don't even have to be exclusive. Seriously, dude, if you're a "hungry man", open Tinder or just go to a local hook up bar.

Hooking up for a one night stand is trivial. I look repulsive and my personality isn't much better. Hookups are quite out of the question. But it must be nice to be attractive and have enough money to go out clubbing. Stop being such a goddamned quitter. Dressing well is the least important. Other people are happy to do it for you. If I can meet biological needs like eating by paying some one and not having to hunt and farm, why shouldn't I have the option of doing the same with sex?

If you want to, go for it. But feeling that you are charmless and ugly is unpleasant even if you can buy sex. These are problems that are at worst, and I do mean worst, ameliorable.

If you tell yourself those things often enough, which frankly sound like what other people have said about you in the past, eventually you start to believe them as fact. Both looks and personality can be improved upon, even if you are on a budget. Perhaps the commenter was merely making a point but no doubt your advice is invaluable.

Glad you've been lucky, but don't make assumptions from data set of 1. It's trivial only for the most attractive and charismatic males. OkCupid has published some nice research on it. Luckily charisma can be learned and overcome all but the most outlying unattractive. But yea prostitution is the world's oldest profession for a reason - sometimes people just want a transactional sexual encounter. For money, one can have no "equal parts" requirement - no need to reciprocate.

It's not for everyone or for me but I can understand the attraction. Some people can indeed easily attract casual sexual partners in a matter of minutes or hours in almost any environment. But the vast majority of the population cannot. It all depends on how do you agree upon this. I've been married, and I've been in open and polyamorous relationships, and difference is enormous.

Frondo 3 months ago. Of course it can. Someone might want to have sex with you, and consent, and then they might want you to stop, and remove consent for you to continue.

Continuing sex with someone after they tell you to stop, no matter what they said before, is sexual assault. Well, yes it can. You have to dismiss massive amounts of male testimonies to say that consent has never ever been removed after the fact. The idea that there's a recurring massive problem of false convictions for rape is bizarre. In most countries it's extremely difficult to get alleged rape prosecuted in the first place and the conviction rate is low.

I'm not going to dispute that it might have happened in some cases but it's a comparatively rare problem. Also, I'm going to assume you're not a native English speaker - the contrasting group nouns should be "men" and "women" not "males" and "girls".

This parenthetical is an odd leap. Perhaps it was meant to suggest that the author who is certainly fluent in, if not a native speaker of, English shouldn't use the word girls to refer to women?

No, its more like the Salem witch hunt. You mean, like millions of illegal immigrants who are working in farming, construction, fast food, and many other industries? How do you feel about scorched earth approach to those?

Apparently trading your body for sex is somehow metaphysically different to trading your body for labor. It most certainly is for an indeterminate number of people.

PurpleBoxDragon 3 months ago. But if you suggest to legalize and regulate it as a means of protecting those who don't wish to participate, you will be seen as a demonic entity who is advocating for sex crimes to be legalized.

I don't think one can defend a crusade that so easily and extremely ignores alternative solutions. I suspect a lot of the push is from very conservative or sex negative views who see this as an opening to roll back some of the recently won sexual freedoms. TallGuyShort 3 months ago. It works both ways with different issues. Generally speaking every political discussion has degraded into accusing the other side of killing children.

How can you compare being the victim of misdesigned automated system, who has no conscience and follows blind rules, to being the victim of a trafficker who has full understanding and responsibility for what he's doing and exploiting a mindless computer system designed for an entirely different purpose? Now I agree we as a society should recognize that some tools, in the hands of the criminal, sociopath or insane can do a lot of harm, and it's fair to move and restrict them. High explosives, nuclear material, anonymous banking are all examples of technologies that, while useful, can and should be restricted.

But at no point it is a fault of the technology, and at no point should we examine the technology divorced from it's nefarious users who ultimately bear responsibility. Restricting useful technology is an extreme measure reserved for the most dangerous situations, otherwise ANY technology can be used for harming others. This particular case seems completely out of balance and likely to have NO impact. I think you may be misreading GP's point.

My reading is that he's likening the frustrations of the non profits with getting through to what they consider faceless entities the companies to the lesser frustrations one may have when one's subjected to an optional IVR experience.

In other words, paraphrasing liberally: I'm not sure how to take your comments, based on your other thoughts. We shouldn't have anonymous banking, i.

I don't think he said anonymous banking should't be available at all - he explicitly said it was useful. Money laundering is one example that comes to mind. If you're a proponent of Crypto currencies you've probably heard similar statements before - this criticism isn't new. Yes, the instinct is understandable, but by the time we're putting NGO experts in government-sponsored working groups for the purpose of drafting legislation, it's pretty much a foregone conclusion that we're expecting something that rises high!

Otherwise, we can almost, somewhat melodramatic exaggeration just let mobs with pitchforks take care of business and save a ton of effort. Kalium 3 months ago. It it a deeply human response to an incredible frustration. After decades of struggle, to help the poor, vulnerable, and oppressed, it's down a couple of faceless corporations that don't seem to care.

Because if they just knew, if they just understood, if they just had a little human empathy and sympathy for the pain and suffering Why then they'd take all their money and smart people and Solve the Problem! That this is perhaps an excessively simplistic view doesn't occur to people who fervently believe that it's simply a matter of making the useless arrogant dweebs do the right thing. Instead, it's scorched earth with good intentions.

My heart aches for the wonderful people saving lives out there. For their deep frustration, and for the purity of their beliefs and intentions. Yet, it's perhaps abstractly possible that empathy and good intentions might be subtly different from good policy. It is also quite unfitting and stupid and innefective. The difference is that this approach could work against IVRs, but not against sex trafficking.

I've actually used CL personals to get some dates, and there are things I liked about it primarily text-focused medium can be nice, are there any more of those? But it is obvious to anyone who has used them that CL personals were utterly overwhelmed by people who are selling the other kind of Saas Sex as a Service.

This was a point of frustration for anyone looking for a connection however unconventional rather than a transaction. But worse, no matter your views on whether people should be able to voluntarily do sex work, with the majority of the w4m traffic being prostitution, it seems all but inevitable that there was some coerced trafficking regularly associated with it.

This was at least nominally against the terms of the personals section, but nobody selling cared at all and in some cases, were cheeky enough to flag legit not-selling-anything ads , and if craigslist mounted any serious effort to fix the problem, it wasn't one I noticed.

This legislation sounds like thoughtless single-dimension policy, but I'm not sure it burns down CL entirely on its own so much as it does forces CL to reckon with the fact that its personals section was already set on fire by pushers much earlier and that they didn't care enough to do anything about it. Which is fine, they obviously never derived revenue from it and are under no obligation to divert resources there or let that drag down the rest of their successful classifieds offering.

That is also largely the government fault because back in they more or less forced CL to close the Sections of the site that was dedicated to Adult Services Its their fault they forced craigslist to shut down a section openly advertising illegal content? I love the contortions people make. It's not like sex work is even legal in the majority of western nations. They failed to stop the crime they were trying to stop, but did ruin something else, so the government's actions were a net negative.

Are you at fault if you just make things worse? I suspect most people would say yes. Governments have a long history of enforcing laws in ways that harm everyone but the criminals they were trying to stop. You shouldn't expect people to be pleased. You assume they were trying to stop the criminals in the first place. Hierarchy of Government Rationality as it pertains to criminal law 1. Control the population 3. Protect Businesses and the Wealthy people that fund Campaigns There is a very very big difference.

FireBeyond 3 months ago. There's also a difference in CL actively putting a section in that says "Illegal Services advertised here". For clarity, there's no concern with legalizing these services, as far as I am concerned. You think it's a violation of your First Amendment rights to be unable to openly advertise criminal activities? Where does that line end?

So what part of that is unclear to you? Freedom of speech is absolute. It you have a limit on speech is stops being free speech, and become regulated speech.

Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps Their power [is] the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots.

It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves. To the extent that Jefferson's being brought in here to say "Yeah, well, that's just, like, [The Supreme Court's] opinion, man" and therefore to dismiss the idea that legally, free speech is not an unabridged right You know that judges are , tautologically, the arbiters of constitutional and legal questions and the supreme court the ultimate arbiters , right?

Even if you said "hey, we're getting rid of all these ultimate arbiter judges because they're oligarchy waiting to happen" the next question is "well, who decides what the law says? But unless you have a specific argument as to why they got it wrong, not only is it true that the court decision reflects the law of the land for now because that's how our system works, chances are pretty good that the court also had a better argument than random HN commentators, even if they have a favorite founding father quote at hand.

It might be better to reach for dissenting opinions instead. Agreed that judges are not infallible, and we must keep watch, both in appointments being made and the judgements they make. That's why the Constitution is structured the way it is. It's important that we continue to do so, particularly now. I also trust, unless proven otherwise, that these judges have studied the law and are acting in good faith, both as arbiters of justice and as American citizens.

These aren't isolated, unique cases. On the whole, I would defer to them over my own opinion, as I would for many experts. And, without additional information about you, I'd defer to their opinion over yours, as I'd expect you to, in the same situation, as well.

I don't believe that there is some conspiracy across all of these judges and justices to systematically deprive citizens of rights. You are free to believe otherwise. I do believe that assuming bad faith across the board is a recipe for the destruction of community, society, and government. Perhaps you believe we're already at that point. I don't believe we are, at least not yet. Given how arbitrarily laws are applied, it is the fault of the people choosing when to arbitrarily apply a law as to the impacts of arbitrarily applying that law.

Symbiote 3 months ago. Nothing bad, just "woman looking for man". I used to see ads in the local free paper with people looking for relationships. Naturally, m4m, w4w, mw4m etc are also understood. WorldMaker 3 months ago. They used to charge by the word in the personal ad, so people got into a lot of common abbreviation habits. The newsweeklies that used to carry personals lost a lot of ad revenue when Craigslist took over the space for free. Some went bankrupt soon after CL added their city, even.

Unlikely that they will get that ad revenue back with CL out of the game, as many won't want to touch personals again for similar reasons to CL, and a lot of the personals space is also moved on to the Match. Then shut down Google too. Well in the case of this particular bill, at least some of the advocates for sex workers had some sense and spoke loudly and clearly about the bad consequences of this law. I suppose if you work directly with people on the front lines of that problem, Craigslist personals might seem pretty trivial in comparison.

To me, the odd thing is they focus on that instead of legalization and helping people report abuses. Legalization is far from perfect but abuse in Nevada brothels is much lower than as street walkers. It seems it's more a puritanical belief system than a genuine desire to render aid. I strongly believe that legalization is the only answer to the problem. Driving things underground is only going to cause more issues and abuse to the sex workers.

It's kind of ironic when in France, for example, a law gets passed criminalizing the customers while the sex workers go in the street to protest that law saying that it will create more abuse and one year after, they were right. Trying to stop behaviors that will always exist in human societies doesn't work, it just drives the demand underground and if things are illegal already, then other more illegal, more abusive behaviors start to surface.

Why do we have to "believe"? There are many examples to learn from, to see what works and what doesn't. For example, this study [0]. Using trafficking data from countries, the authors find that "countries where prostitution is legal experience a larger reported incidence of human trafficking inflows. The minimum estimate of sex trafficking victims in the country increased from 9, in to 11, in , to 12, in Sweden has one of the harshest stances on prostitution, and it's working just fine [1].

Those count reported cases, not convictions, and by design can't contain unreported cases. The ramp up into could indicate that law enforcement took a while to properly take advantage of that. That's a narrative like the comment I was responding to , not backed by any studies as far as I can tell. Sex trafficking has always been illegal, and the reasons for its under-reporting have little to do with prostitution being illegal. The legalization narrative is about sexual abuse in the general sense both for sex workers and the broader population and not specifically trafficking.

You are redefining English in attempt to use a paper that is entirely conjecture based on the predispositions of the authors. Sex workers are objecting to this law because it is cutting off their ability to communicate dangerous clients to each other.

That will lead to an increase in them getting raped. Like, I get you want to say "Sex trafficking bad and clearly that is the only issue that matters" but it is far from the only issue. Trafficked persons, in a legal environment, are going to have their place of work inspected, regular interviews with the police for licensing, and their citizenship status checked. The studies of early legalization Germany are so fun for opponents to push because they know Germany did not do this for the first years.

It is like comparing a known, obviously broken implementation and insisting all implementations look like that or that is the only measure of success.

The higher number is for cities that license sex work in the tippelzone; the lower figure is for cities without a licensing process. That result persists beyond two years. Given these types of laws rarely change and are fairly uniform across regions, our knowledge about the impact of decriminalizing sex work is largely conjectural. We exploit the fact that a Rhode Island District Court judge unexpectedly decriminalized indoor prostitution in to provide the first causal estimates of the impact of decriminalization on the composition of the sex market, rape offenses, and sexually transmitted infection outcomes.

Not surprisingly, we find that decriminalization increased the size of the indoor market. However, we also find that decriminalization caused both forcible rape offenses and gonorrhea incidence to decline for the overall population. Our synthetic control model finds fewer reported rape offenses 31 percent decrease and 1, fewer cases of female gonorrhea 39 percent decrease from to I'm sure that places with legalized drugs also experience increases in drug trafficking inflows.

And the overall alcohol consumption in the USA rose after the prohibition. The authors note that legalization could have other positive effects, such making it easier for prostitutes to seek legal or medical help and decreasing rates of abuse and sexually-transmitted disease.

The real key, and it's also highlighted in your [0] link, is if the situation is better for almost everyone after legalizing. About the Sweden example, claiming that "since the law came into effect fewer men reported purchasing sex and prostitutes were less visible" your [1] link is a winning situation is a bit lame.

Of course after a prohibition you expect the prostitution to go underground and less visible. It's like denying paedophilia just because nobody reports himself as a peadophile and you cannot see children on the streets. Yes it's a bad idea. Imagine we had legalized drugs, but barely anyone wanted to make them, because making them was nasty and degrading in a way that few people could even tolerate.

No matter what you did, you simply couldn't find enough people willing to make them. Paying them more wont help, because beyond a certain point the nastiness of making them can't be washed away with money.

So the next step is coercing people to do so. Part of the power of abusing people is taking away people's paperwork and convincing them the police won't help them. Arnt 3 months ago. FWIW there's been another reform in Germany. Brothels and prostitution are legal, provided prostitutes register with the police. Skipping that interview is a crime for the brothel owner , not just the prostitute. A contradicting practical example is the situation with legal brothels in Turkey. The goverment wants them shut but the women working there wants them kept open, because otherwise they have no option but to go underground, and then they lose access to facilities like security and routine health controls.

When some years ago the Istanbul municipality tried to shut them off the women protested: This does not take into account the increased number of ppl. IanCal 3 months ago. Those numbers are all available. Germany's population is very stable and changed by 0.

Just looking at a trend is not enough. Firstly, The entire paper is guesswork. There are no official numbers to support the fact that legalising prostitution increases the victim count. The discussion was about abuse, not about total number of trafficking incidents. Germany also failed to properly regulate its brothels with the same vigor as they apply to other industries which was genuinely unfortunate.

All it takes is going to legal brothels with business licenses and checking citizenship status. Sweden has more rapes per capita than any country outside of sub-saharan Africa.

Whatever system they have they can keep. It seems some of the men living in Sweden are among the planets worst sexual predators, to word it carefully. Sweden is pushing new legislation that will increase the number of rapes even more. It will be a law of consent and will shift the burden of proof from the victim to the rapist.

Unless the rapist can prove consent, he will be sentenced for rape by negligence. Under the new law, having sex with a traffic victim prostitute can be considered "rape", and the burden of proof will be on the john to prove that it is not a traffic victim. Here we talk of the "Swedish condition".

Blackstone4 3 months ago. How will this work? If neither party can prove consent, they both rapped each other by negligence? Or does this only apply to Johns? Blame the man, it's the only way to reach gender equality. I'm curious, is there any Norwegian commentary on Sweden in English? Google translate is far from perfect but except for media clips obviously it's extremely helpful for getting the gist.

I recall this is Because their definition is far broader - if it was applied to other countries the number of rapes would increase. I think it's to do with the collection of statistics as well. They record the rape at the initial reporting to the police, no matter what any later investigation shows, and multiple rapes are counted individually many countries do not.

This is not saying which approach is correct for recording the numbers, but that you cant simply compare the numbers. This is a well known trope especially in less palatable corners of the internet.

A quick read of the "Rape in Sweden" [0] wikipedia page explains why these numbers are very high. Each separate relation is counted as a different rape, the definition of rape is broader, and the reporting rate is higher. For people that lived in Sweden, this claim that Sweden has some incredible rape problem is surprising to say the least. It's worth pointing out that the "Nordic Model" used in Sweden is indeed harsh, but only for pimps and buyers.

Prostitutes themselves are not punished with a criminal record like they are in the US. Instead they are offered support to exit. Which makes sense if you really want them to to leave that industry.

Legit jobs are hard to find with a record, so it's no wonder people who get arrested for crimes like prostitution and drug dealing often end up in the same situation after getting arrested. Your post came as a surprise.

It seems like they've been under-regulated. Oh course German sex trafficing increased; prostitution is illegal in the neighboring countries, so now Germany's border regions service a large international customer base.

Sex tourism is also big thing for some cities. The market got a lot bigger the second prostitution was legalized. I strongly believe that legalization is the only answer to the problem I agree, but It's not a complete solution. Where I live brothels are legal, there is one 5 minutes from my house yet there are still street workers. The street workers are generally suffering from homelessness, mental health issues, drugs or all three.

Legal brothels take care of much of the demand side, but they don't do much for people pushed into selling themselves. Most folks don't think it is a complete solution, and perhaps simply not limiting prostitution to brothels is one of the expansions that would work.

You can still outlaw selling from the streets and require folks be registered and working through personals and whatnot, with some safety plans in place. It seems the solution for these particular folks would be to focus less on picking them up for prostitution and instead, finding them safe housing, repeatedly offering mental health care, and repeatedly offering addiction services or at least helping them find a way to avoid feeling like they are forced into prostitution.

With prostitution itself being legal, it is much easier to focus on these sorts of technicalities. This appears to be a popular thesis among the commenters on this page. But your hunch is not proven by the realities of countries that have legalized prostitution.

As I've commented elsewhere here, all you have to do is study the laws of prostitution elsewhere in the world to understand that they have little to no influence on sex trafficking. As I noted in another comment, all you have to do is study the laws of prostitution elsewhere in the world to understand that they have little to no influence on sex trafficking.

This is true, unfortunately, of many public interest groups. Dealing with sex abuse victims all day destroys your objectivity.

I wonder if the timing has anything to do with a recent particularly shocking case of sexual exploitation involving Craigslist: There can be various degrees of hysteria around both those topics, but the equivalency you seem to be suggesting is false, for me. The internet doesn't enable trafficking as directly as guns enable shootings. It's a tautology and irrelevant to say guns enable shootings. Guns make murder convenient, just as the Internet makes certain crimes convenient.

But in both cases, the majority of the user base is benign and law abiding, and legislation would negatively affect them, arguably more than it would affect the bad actors.

People are using Craigslist and Backpage to advertise sex trafficking victims for sale and using other internet services to engage in the communications to coordinate those sales and sometimes even to process the payments for those sales.

Seems pretty direct to me. Some of the non-profits dedicated to fighting this opposed the bill! They tried asking nicely with Backpage, and it failed entirely. It's kind of ridiculous considering the original bill wasn't intended to protect tech companies from this type of shit. CyberDildonics 3 months ago. For every problem worth solving there is an answer that is simple, easy, and wrong. Was that during the Child Safety Protection Act? Zamicol 3 months ago. They had to wait 10 years to get a GOP majority in the House and Senate and a nominally conservative President to rubber stamp it.

IBM 3 months ago. It's taken this long because it took until now for people to start falling out of love with the tech industry, including many politicians.

Having Wyden in their pocket won't be enough anymore. The skepticism of the tech industry is surprisingly bipartisan, which bodes well on a number of fronts including antitrust scrutiny and potentially the equivalent of GDPR if we're lucky. There is no "shared ground. Craigslist should self police and remove posts that more or less are openly illegal in a way defined by the laws of the land. It's not like they are just discussing it or using free speech, its openly advocating the sale of illegal services and should be against Craiglist's own TOS.

I mean hell, if they were facilitating the illegal sale of guns this site would be up in arms to ban them. In general the public does not treat all forms of illegal activity facilitation the same and this is a good thing. Some forms of illegal activity facilitation are much worse than others in the eyes of the public.

Hacker News new comments show ask jobs submit. DannyBee 3 months ago This is not surprising, but sad. SeeDave 3 months ago In defense of the "scorched earth approach or nothing" folks: DoreenMichele 3 months ago What if the lawmakers want to hurt the people struggling at at the lower rungs of society? NotSammyHagar 3 months ago I would believe that lots of politicians do want to hurt people at the lower rungs.

Declanomous 3 months ago There's an interesting theory, which I can't recall the name of, that says that poor people understand the rich because they can empathize with them, but it takes too much energy for the rich to empathize with the poor because there are so many of them and their burden is overwhelming. Declanomous 3 months ago http: DanBC 3 months ago I'm in favour of careful legalisation.

DoreenMichele 3 months ago Bring it all into the open. DoreenMichele 3 months ago No, they aren't the same. DoreenMichele 88 days ago My understanding of the difference is rooted in the opinions of Dolores French who was a sex worker and political activist.

DanBC 3 months ago [flagged]. DoreenMichele 3 months ago I have provided both a link to an article that communicates my understanding of the topic as well as cited the original source where I got the info, plus stated as clearly as I can that googling it may lead to additional confusion because articles on the topic are contradictory. Illniyar 3 months ago Actually prostitution is legal in Nevada but not in the big cities. Retric 3 months ago That number is pretending to be accurate the error bars are rediculus to have 3 digits.

Bartweiss 3 months ago Perhaps more directly - if we're trying to stop sex trafficking by shutting down the places where victims meet clients, we're going to have to ban streets. Fjolsvith 3 months ago Or why can't we ban churches because pastors can use them to rape or molest church members? DanBC 3 months ago You get those same benefits if you keep buying sex illegal but decriminalise selling.

HelloNurse 3 months ago Abuse in a brothel involves an idiot, a prostitute and a lot of other people possibly including bouncers , while abuse of a street walker involves only an idiot, a prostitute and a lonely place. Noos 3 months ago It got worse because no one wants to be a prostitute, and there has always been a strong coercive element to women entering that profession. TeMPOraL 3 months ago Sure, but the question is about the relative sizes of the markets and the amount of involuntary suffering involved.

Frondo 3 months ago Of course it can. PurpleBoxDragon 3 months ago But if you suggest to legalize and regulate it as a means of protecting those who don't wish to participate, you will be seen as a demonic entity who is advocating for sex crimes to be legalized.

..

: Craigslist eny west brothel

Personal escorts Locanto casual mascot escort
Craigslist eny west brothel 819
Adult classifies craigslist personals dating New South Wales Girls looking to fuck adult classifieds
Craigslist eny west brothel

We dared to be ourselves. Some residents were still eager to leave, only to come back later. Another who attempted to go to the surface was Bob Kalinski, a speed addict known as the fastest cook east of the Mississippi, who could fry twenty eggs at a time when on amphetamines. A heart attack forced him to try his luck with the public housing system in He too returned in the following months. The sense of belonging simply was too strong.

The tunnel was a better place for him to be alone in freedom. I keep walking along the tracks. Jon must have passed out drunk, now, somewhere behind me. Every noise is threatening in the tunnel, and I find myself constantly looking over my shoulder, ready to face something too awful to name. Was that a train I heard? The metallic vibration of a dragged chain?

It smells like death here. The pungent stench of rotting meat. The smell of death all over now. Are those eyes glowing nearby? I lean against the wall and try to breathe calmly, reminding myself this place is only populated by old memories and the occasional homeless person looking for a safe place to be. The rumbling feels closer. I see rats scurrying by, racing into the obscurity. Then I see the charred remains of an animal in the corner of an alcove — a raccoon maybe, a big rodent with liquefied flesh, burnt fur and missing limbs.

I walk away holding my breath. The ground is littered with discarded books and magazines. A broken crack pipe has been left on a cinder block. There is a garden chair, and overturned crates and buckets. A mangled teddy bear.

His clothes are spotless, regularly washed at a nearby laundromat. Maybe talk to some people. An ex-girlfriend and a kid. He rents an apartment from a friend when his kid comes to visit, a clean studio in a gray Washington Heights building. I nod and he goes into an abandoned service room, returning with two mugs. I hurt a lot of people. I collect cans, it keeps me busy.

I do it all week long. The coffee is nice and strong. The streets are full of opportunities if you know where to look. I deal with what I have. The worsening quality of the local drugs means accidents are now more frequent than ever, with overdose-related deaths in In the buildings he helps maintain, he occasionally sells the tenants K2 — a form of synthetic marijuana that recently boomed across the city, especially in East Harlem where a homeless encampment was recently dismantled.

This is who I am. We both eat in silence. The incentives paid by the Department of Homeless Services to landlords renting out shelter units far exceed the ones given for providing tenants with permanent single room occupancy lodging. In , the average stay was days at the Freedom House , a homeless shelter on West 95th Street managed by private company Aguila Inc.

Conditions are appalling inside the Freedom House. Garbage piles up in the courtyard for rodents to feed on. Sometimes a TV is hurled out a window , or the police close the street after someone is stabbed in a fight. The NYPD regularly raids the place looking for people with outstanding warrants, targeting domestic abusers and failing to arrest the major dealers or car thieves roaming the area.

The year-old knows enough about shelters. She will never go back. She was sixteen when she got pregnant with her daughter Alyssa. Jessica was then diagnosed with schizoaffective disorder and admitted to transitional housing in Brooklyn. She says that within a month, social services was badgering her to place her three-year-old in foster care.

I called my sister and begged her to take care of Alyssa until I found a place of my own. But it was the right thing to do. At least she is with family. When she grows up I will explain it all to her. She looks away, tears rolling down her face. Once her daughter was in the hands of her sister, Jessica was sent to the Freedom House where she stayed for seven months until Aguila notified her of her imminent relocation.

She began sleeping in a subway tunnel after transit authorities made her leave her spot in the Herald Square station corridor on 34th Street, dragging her by her feet when she refused to stand up from her mat.

She spent about two months living in a recess by the subway tracks of a Midtown station, protected from the elements and from harassment. She wrote a long letter to her daughter there. She never sent it. I miss you everyday. I love you so much. Soon she will give them to her daughter.

Trash as far as the eye can see. Brooklyn might be the oldest resident of the Riverside Park tunnel. Now fifty-four, she has been living here since , when she discovered the place by following feral cats. Like Bernard Isaac, she appeared in various films and documentaries. She has perfected her story for journalists along the years. Everything she relates is recited like a school lesson.

Her stint in the Marines. The death of her parents and the loss of her family house. The kids lighting her cardboard shack on fire in the park.

Her boyfriend BK and their issues. The food bowls left at her door for the forty-nine cats she feeds. She is a tough woman who speaks her mind, and she has the unyielding attitude of someone who has trudged through life.

Her bandana and dreadlocks make her look younger than she is. That would be nice. The stew is surprisingly tasty. You never get used to it. After she finishes eating, Brooklyn shows me a pile of recycling bags filled with countless Poland Spring water bottles collected at a nearby bodega. Brooklyn is disappointed when I tell her I have to go. She calls one of her cats as I keep walking to the south end of the tunnel. The whole place feels like a grave.

A cathedral for the dead and the fallen. Nothing is left from the former shacks. Even the smallest pieces of debris are gone. A raw, burning power that some, like Isaac, will seek their whole life. Sane immediately sprayed the quote on the wall. A train rushes by, almost silent with its unbearably bright lights, the air swelling around me as the cars dash past.

This place is not for anyone to be , I think. I wait for dreams to come. Sleeping in the tunnel is an alien experience, but the sight of rain falling down the ventilation grates and streaking the chiaroscuro light is worth it alone, definite proof that poetry can endure anywhere. This is the final byproduct of the city.

This is a dark and wild beast inviting you to come closer because nothing will ever be all right, but she will always be at your side to keep you warm. Amtrak Police Captain Doris Comb started calling for more enforcement, effectively pushing the homeless out of the active railway. Different times were looming ahead. They feel rejected and decline assistance. Bernard Isaac still held a grudge against Comb eighteen years later, for having seized the universal key to the exit gates an Amtrak employee had given him.

Some flatly refused to cooperate and gave up all hope of being granted Section 8 apartments. Margaret Morton would later write in a New York Times article that this solution had been by far the most economical for the city.

As the photojournalist Teun Voeten would discover in , some of the former squatters later achieved normal lives again. There would even be success stories. Then there were the others. One would commit suicide, sitting in front of a running train. Another was found dead in his apartment. Another succumbed to AIDS. Bernard Isaac passed away in late , closing a chapter of an old New York legend.

His ashes were sprinkled across a creek in his native Florida. The legend was gone, but homelessness was more real than ever. According to Coalition for the Homeless, between 58, and 60, persons slept in NYC municipal shelters every month of , an all-time record since the Great Depression, with numbers increasing for the sixth consecutive year.

There were 42, homeless children across the five boroughs in Everything else becomes a symptom. The cause is lack of affordable housing. The median Manhattan rent jumped more than seven percent in August compared to the same period in , while affordable housing placements fell sixty percent between and At the time of his declaration, only five people had been found living in the Riverside Park tunnel, but a different community was already growing on a nearby dead-end street dubbed the Batcave.

His Goya reproduction has been damaged by water. In a few years from now, it will be completely gone, washed away by the elements. Morning light is different in the tunnel — colder maybe, and whiter, casting long straight beams onto the rails.

Wind gusts make dust rise up in whirlpools. A blue jay flies past a grate. I wake up and New York slowly comes to life. Carlos lives holed up in an old sewer pipe of about six feet high by five feet wide near the south entrance to the Riverside Park tunnel. He is one of the few original dwellers who stayed. His house is small but very practical, entirely concealed by a metal lid he takes great care of pulling on every time he gets inside.

His electricity is tapped from an outlet further down the tunnel, allowing him to store his food in a refrigerator and have heat during winter.

I read a lot. All kinds of books. I read them and I sell them. The increased police patrols make his life less simple than it was a few years ago, but he keeps an upbeat attitude about it. Sometimes they try to make me leave. Carlos shows me where a decomposing body was found by Amtrak workers in , months after taggers had discovered it. Two femurs bundled in cargo pants, neatly laid into an old child stroller, with pieces of leathered skin still attached to them, and a skull standing on top of a nearby pole.

We find the old man sleeping on a couch behind a safety wall. Inside, a sentence is underlined in blue ink. We stay a moment at his side before I finally leave the tunnel, emerging from the wet ground behind a grove of trees. The streets seem slower than usual. Hurt just makes us hurt. And hurt lives in the land of the lost, and unites them in missing love and broken homes, for five cents a can, cans per day. The few Mole People left today survive in hurt. They are relics of a New York that was, and witnesses of a world so estranged that nobody truly remembers it anymore.

Most are too late for the topside life. How easy it would be to go away and never come back. But this is their city. This is their home. These are their minds wandering and their time slipping. Their hopes and their thirsts until the sun goes down. Away — to a place made of birches and wet leaves and blue afternoons and muddy clothes, a place where dark days would be foreign — a place for them and all the unseen, warm as liquor, where hurt would be sweet and love would be real. Seventy-five years later, its gay stars are finally opening up.

The hotel was likely decorated with muted colors in the modernist style of the previous decade. All available supplies needed to go toward the war effort.

The story was similar in baseball. With most of the Major League Baseball players deployed, executives decided to fill the gap with female players, paving the way for the A. When she told the story later in her life, she gave the reason: In Their Own League.

Players had to attend charm school and wear lipstick on the field. Their uniforms had skirts instead of pants — not great for sliding, but deemed appropriately feminine by league owner Philip K.

Though it was never explicitly stated, historians and players alike say the rules were in place, in part, to prevent the women from being perceived as lesbians. Donahue was in Nova Scotia for the winter when she met Henschel, who was 19 at the time.

The two women hit it off, keeping in touch when Donahue moved back to the U. The next day was her birthday. For seven decades the two told almost everyone, aside from their inner circle, that they were best friends.

For 70 years theirs has been a love story, originating in a time when the only love stories we were allowed to tell were those between a man and a woman. Try to ask most former players about the issue and they clam up. The players could have lost more than just their baseball careers if they had been open about their queerness.

They could have lost their families, occupations, and reputations, too. That stigma has carried on for decades.

She was the first to start an N. She then played for the independent, otherwise all-male St. Paul Saints and Duluth-Superior Dukes. Indeed, that same year, the book SportsDykes: Stories From On and Off the Field was also published. She understands today that talking about being a gay athlete is a double-edged sword, in a way.

But this stereotype existed long before Borders was even born. Cahn in her book Coming on Strong: Gender and Sexuality in Twentieth Century Sports. It was this perception of female athletes as unfeminine and unfeminine women as lesbians that led Wrigley, a chewing gum manufacturer and president of the Chicago Cubs, to insist that his players be appropriately feminine in appearance. When the affair was between teammates, chaperones would refuse to let the suspected couple room together and gauge the reaction of the players to confirm their hunch.

In one case, the suspected lovers were so angry about being barred from becoming roommates that team manager Johnny Gottselig considered it proof of the affair. In another case, a married player was rumored to have fallen for one of her teammates. Another time, Leo said that a married player was discovered to be in a relationship with a woman who was unassociated with the league.

Leo claimed he notified her husband, who came and took her home. However, many of the players came to the league quite sheltered. They often arrived from small towns or rural areas and were quite young when they left home. As a result, it was not uncommon for new or younger players to be completely blindsided by the relationships between their teammates.

Dorothy Hunter entered the League in , when she was Well, I just thought they were giving me the gears because I was a green Canadian. But many of the players were unattached. If straight players were married, many of their husbands were off at war or were left back at home on farms or in factories. It was in many ways the perfect environment for gay women to become involved with each other.

But in some cases, the near-inability to date was a welcome reality. It made staying in the closet easier, because there was no time for dating and so there was no need to make excuses. This was something that Borders discovered, too, when she was playing ball in the s.

These restrictions kept some women out of the league altogether. One of those women was Dot Wilkinson, often regarded as the greatest softball player of her time — and perhaps all time. Wilkinson was a hard-playing catcher for the Phoenix Ramblers. She joined the American Softball Association A. I never thought about anything else.

Wilkinson was recruited to play in the A. But it was more than that. She also knew that the league was actively discouraging players from being perceived as exactly what Wilkinson was — gay. But she had another love, too. Wilkinson and Caito played together for two seasons, until the A. I t is the obituaries that offer the most publicly available clues to some of the players who spent their lives with other women.

The most telling evidence is often in veiled language or titles that are open to interpretation. She attended the mass tryout at Wrigley Field, becoming one of the original members of the league in During the season, she was traded to the Kenosha Comets. Her contract was not renewed in , forcing her to try out again. After leaving the league, she became a physical education teacher. She is rumored to have impressed Babe Ruth with how far she could hit a softball, and it is said he squeezed the biceps on her arm when he posed with her for a photo.

In the Brooklyn Dodgers invited Deegan and two other women to their spring training camp. If she were a man, she no doubt would have been a Dodger. Deegan died of breast cancer in at the age of The two shared their passion for softball: Nusse passed away just six months after Deegan died, at age She was the first chairperson of the Players Association Board and two-time A.

One of the best pitchers to ever play in the A. The girl from Rockford, Illinois, played 10 seasons in the league. In that time she threw three no hitters, had three win seasons, and had an unassisted triple play — something that has only happened 15 times in Major League Baseball since Cione spent her rookie year in with the Rockford Peaches and finished with an astonishing 1.

It was a treat to watch a game with her. She analyzed every play. Catcher Eunice Taylor and her partner of 45 years, Diana Walega, owned and operated a pet supply store for 40 years. Their obituaries, which are historical documents, offer us glimpses into their lives and are open for us to interpret.

In their younger days, they look like they could be sisters as they pose in front of a Christmas tree in a picture that might have been taken in the s. They each sport short, dark hairstyles and wear sleeveless turtleneck shirts. In another, they are perhaps in their 60s and they dance together in front of a fireplace.

They are both laughing. Their hairstyles have not changed in the decades between the two photos except to turn from brown to gray. They are ready to tell the world the truth about their relationship. Another photo shows the two of them doing what they had only ever done behind closed doors: Their eyes are closed. But they hid this truth for as long as they did because, for most of their lives, they had too much to lose by coming out.

She had ascended to a level that no woman ever had before. And then, she quit. Borders looks out onto the field of women whose uniforms are streaked with dirt. My analyst and I grew more intimately connected each week of treatment My entire body feels tense, not ideal for the setting. I try to relax, but the plush leather couch crumples under me when I shift, making the movements extraordinary.

Of course it has. On the surface, when the patient has been highly selective of the discussion topics, therapy always resembles a friendly get-together. I so supremely wanted this not to come up. She quickly and convincingly pointed out that I work rather hard and am, ultimately, paying my bills on time, that I have friends, an appreciation for arts and culture, and so on.

Then Lori heightened the discussion a bit. I was too insecure and too single to handle such a compliment from a beautiful woman. I shrugged my shoulders, only half looking up. I laughed a little, uncomfortably. She gently explained she could tell the day I walked into her office for the first time, after I flashed a bright smile and casually asked where she was from.

Lori snorts, rolls her eyes. I smile, shake my head and look around the room, denying acceptance of my own ridiculous reality. I look again at her stark blue eyes, prevalent under dark brown bangs, the rest of her hair reaching the top of her chest, which is hugged nicely by a fitted white tee under an open button-down. Do you bend me over and take me from behind? I take a second to let the red flow out of my face, and ponder what she said.

So I go home, incredibly turned on and completely unashamed. In treatment I came to realize that all people have contradictions to their personalities. In my case, my extreme sensitivity can make me feel fabulous about the aspects of myself that I somehow know are good my artistic tastes and cause deep hatred of those traits I happen to loathe the thirty pounds I could stand to lose.

My next session with Lori is productive. One constant is that I put crudely high expectations on others, mirroring those thrown upon me as a kid. Then, a week later, Lori mentions it, and I become tense again. There were two ways to find out:. Here we go again. Lori, ever intently, peers into my eyes, wrinkles her mouth and slightly shakes her head. We both know the answer to that question.

All I can do is stare back. I see what she means. When our sessions finally resumed, I could not wait to tell her about my budding relationship with Shauna. Plans happened magically without anxiety-inducing, twenty-four-hour waits between texts. Her quick wit kept me entertained, and I could tell by the way she so seriously spoke about dancing, her chosen profession, that she is passionate about the art form and mighty talented too.

Shauna is beautiful, with flawless hazel eyes and straight dark hair, spunky bangs and a bob that matches her always-upbeat character. She is a snazzy dresser and enjoys a glass of whiskey with a side of fried pickles and good conversation as much as I do. So upon the precipice of my return to therapy I told Shauna about Lori, and admitted to having mixed feelings about what I was getting back into.

The first two sessions of my therapeutic reboot had gone great. Lori appeared genuinely thrilled that I was dating Shauna and could see how happy I was. I stuff the cat food back into the Tupperware and toss it into the refrigerator. I make my way into the living room, angry at myself for not changing the settings on my new iPhone to disallow text previews on the locked screen. I can tell she regrets looking at my phone without my permission, but I completely understand her feelings.

On my walk home, instead of being angry at Lori, I understand her thinking behind the text. A patient may in turn contemplate that a love is blossoming between them, and, in fact, it sort of is. This takes genuine care and acceptance on their part. In employing countertransference — indicating that she had feelings for me — she was keeping me from feeling rejected and despising my own thoughts and urges.

Atlas has an upcoming book titled The Enigma of Desire: Atlas explains that there are certain boundaries that cannot be crossed between therapist and patient under any circumstances — like having sex with them, obviously.

What do you do with that? Do you deny it? Do you talk about it? How do you talk about it without seducing the patient and with keeping your professional ability to think and to reflect? I ask her about the benefits of exploring intimacy in therapy, and Dr. Atlas quickly points out that emotional intimacy — though not necessarily that of the sexual brand — is almost inevitable and required.

Atlas says this topic speaks to every facet of the therapeutic relationship, regardless of gender or even sexual orientation, because intimacy reveals emotional baggage that both the patient and therapist carry with them into the session. In order to be able to be vulnerable, both parties have to feel safe.

After I briefly explain all that has gone on between me and Lori, Dr. Atlas steadfastly says she does not want to judge too harshly why and how everything came to pass in my therapy. Maybe I wanted to interview Lori about erotic transference in my therapy sessions for that same reason as well…to stand out as the most amazingly understanding patient ever.

In order for Lori to advance in her field as a social worker, she has to attend 3, conference hours with another professional to go over casework — kind of like therapy quality control. We talk about all of this during one of my scheduled sessions, for the entire hour — and go over by a few minutes, too.

It can become a cycle of behavior that Lori seeks to break. I refer back to the time when, unprovoked, she brought up my attraction to her. There was no in between. Lori noticed that I was frustrated with myself and wanted me to know that an attraction to a therapist is so normal and happens so frequently that there are technical terms for it. I turn my attention towards the presence of countertransference in our session. Lying in bed with Shauna a few months into our relationship, I ask her what she thought about me the moment she first saw me.

She says she liked the fact that I was wearing a blazer and a tie on a first date. She adds that I was a little shorter than she anticipated, but was content with the two of us at least being the same exact height.

I explain that my insecurity could often get the better of me in dating situations. It seems my emotional workouts in erotic transference were just beginning to produce results. But, so you have a full understanding of how this works, we can date. The difference this time is the answer I want to give is on par with all of my involuntary urges.

Would Lori and I really be compatible in every way? Would she ever see me as a lover, a partner, an equal, and not a patient? Could I ever reveal a detail about myself, or even just a shitty day of work, without wondering if she was picking it apart and analyzing it? Frankly, all those questions could be answered in the positive. Work payments that were past due are finally finding their way into my bank account.

As it turns out, my short-term money troubles were not an indication that I had no business being a writer, or that my life changeup was as irresponsible as unprotected sex at fourteen years old.

I took a mental step back from my current situation and realized that in spite of my recent hardships, I was succeeding. My high school boyfriend and I made a bet: Neither of us was ready for what came next. You can go home on the following conditions: Because your life depends on it. I agreed, and stood behind the Plexiglass window by the nursing station, waiting for the bin that held all the belongings I had been required to hand over the day I checked in: As I threaded my sneakers and prepared to keep my promise by jogging home to the apartment I shared with four other Yale grad students, I remembered another deal, the one that started this whole mess.

The one I had made about a decade earlier with my high school boyfriend. A deal about sex, running and the Mormon Church. I fell for my first boyfriend when I was 15, arriving home from church on one of those sticky, Upstate New York, summer afternoons. After a morning of trying to be a good Latter-day Saint by skipping breakfast, putting on a dress, and spending three hours reading scripture and singing songs about how my body is a temple and the only person I should ever let inside it was my wedded husband , all I could think about was peeling off my sweaty pantyhose and stuffing my face with Cinnamon Toast Crunch.

Then I saw him, running by my house. Up until that moment, I had ignored this boy, who had moved to our neighborhood the year before from Maine. But what I was seeing as I felt my stomach growl and my nylons riding down my crotch was a puberty miracle. He had transformed from a skinny, seemingly weak, invisible kid to a lithe, powerful athlete who ran with the joy and abandon of Pheidippides and the irresistible style and charisma of Prefontaine.

I was a goner. His natural, fluid, effortless laps over the rolling hills surrounding our neighborhood awed me. At that point I was getting clobbered as a field hockey fullback, desperately defending the goal against an onslaught of veteran hoss players. I was in the lineup because the team was short-handed that year and took anyone who would wear a skirt and hold a stick.

Unlike my new crush, who ran for love of the sport, I used athletics as an outlet — a way to deal with the teenage sexual energy I urgently needed to suppress. I was skinny, muscular and scrappy, but this never translated to excellence in any of my athletic pursuits. By my teen years, I had bounced around, a few seasons here and there, on every team imaginable: The insta-crush I had on my neighbor was mutual, and we quickly became obsessed with each other.

I learned that, aside from running, my new boyfriend loved jazz and kissing. He taught me to french while listening to hours and hours of John Lee Hooker records. I remember lying on his bed, stiff and resistant, a hair-trigger of curiosity, puberty and guilty self-loathing.

His first lick — barely touching the inside of my lips and the tip of my teeth — was infused with the knowledge, beyond his years, that his only job was to keep me from bolting, to stay, and want just a little more. What a terrible, wonderful moment — to realize what I wanted was not to run away, but to stop and be still, to taste and be tasted, and to let someone know this secret about me that I was supposed to keep to myself for many virginal years to come.

I settled for his armpits — the only other place, besides his mouth, I could possibly justify as not being explicitly forbidden, and the one spot I could reach without actually undressing him.

Taking his shirt off felt too wrong, so I pulled and stretched the collar of his v-neck t-shirt down to access what I wanted, chafing his neck and strangling him a little in the process. We swam in Lake Ontario every chance we got because it was the one permissible activity that allowed us to gaze at and lie next to each other with the least amount of clothing on our bodies as possible.

Though he continued to win races, and I aced my AP courses, we cared about little else than the next time we could wear our mouths out on each other. The two of us, together, mattered more than food. But what can matter more than sex? The first time my boyfriend tried to lift my shirt, asking me if he could just touch the places my modest one-piece bathing suit concealed, I shut him down and explained the rules governing my morality and chastity. I had to explain that, as a true believer and follower of the faith, I was percent committed to: Or below my collarbone.

And are you saying like…even no…premarital fingering? No going down action at all? He was devastated and incredulous. The only rules about sex his hippie parents had taught him to live by were to always give a girl more pleasure first than he ever expected to get in return; never give her any reason to fear or distrust him; and, most importantly, take every means necessary to avoid STDs and pregnancy.

But my boyfriend somehow loved and cared about me more than he loved sex, so he respected my rules. He just could not confine his competitive streak to running — he wanted to win my body over so bad. His creativity paid off. I began to cross my own boundaries, and try things my church had never explicitly stated were wrong, but felt so good I knew they must be.

I was thrilled to discover dry humping — how had my bishop not thought to scream from the pulpit that this was basically sex and should be totally forbidden?! But these momentary, forbidden pleasures always morphed into aching guilt. My boyfriend started to see how tortured I was, getting excited, then disconnecting and withdrawing, over and over and over again.

We started to fight. Why are you putting yourself through this suffering and denial of every urge and instinct? Why do you shut the juices down just as they are getting going?! What kind of crazy, dogmatic, cultish system would make you want to do such a thing?

I told him we should break up. That he would never understand. But instead of breaking up, he made me a deal: He would learn about my religion, if I would learn about running. Running was his church, the dogma behind his discipline, self-sacrifice and denial.

He promised to try to understand Mormonism if I would learn to run. I joined the track team for the first time as a high school senior. It was one of the few teams I had never tried; running was the hardest, least enjoyable part of every other sport I had played. An athletic activity consisting solely of running felt like suffering, distilled to its most concentrated form. And unlike the mostly mediocre-with-random-lucky-moments-of-stellar-performance I managed in other sports, I was a terrible runner.

Practices were torture sessions. Unlike almost everyone else on my team who had been doing this crazy shit since junior high, I had never run for more than a mile in my entire life. During the usual seven-milers we cranked out each day after school, my heart beat so hard I thought it would explode. Though the girls on my team ran together in a tight unit, making sure to pace so that no one was left behind, my experience was not of comradery, but of loneliness.

Then you have the problem of the types of people that could work with drug dealers and sex workers may have more fluid ethics that could be corrupted in some ways. For example, if everyone could be like Violet Blue that would be one thing. But I could imagine some less than savory person applying for the job but with the intent to look the other way for some payback. I think we really need to stop thinking about the problems as if there is some uncorruptable benevolent "government" that is going to help us.

And start think about systems that are realistically run by fallible people but have checks and balances in place to remove corruption. Like maybe the "terrible" government is responsible for punishing only? I don't know how to solve the problems honestly, just seems like we are looking where the light is rather than where we lost our keys maybe down the sewer. This is the corruption trap that you see in narco-regimes and countries where government institutions are being built or rebuilt.

If you prosecute people for corrupt behavior, then your prosecutors and justice system now have to make the same decision. Ultimately, rule of law only exists because of tradition and a sufficiently widespread support of it. Decriminalization is a better approach than legalization and regulation. If it is decriminalized, then victims don't have to live in fear of the police.

Legalization and regulation often makes things worse, not better. We can start decriminalizing now, open up more if it appears to work. Whatever policy we choose, it should have a clear goal and be evaluated against how well t achieves that goal.

I think decriminalization work further both of those goals. Isn't this the same as with legalization? Do you have examples of this? No, they aren't the same. Unfortunately, googling decriminalization vs legalization gets me articles that state the exact opposite of my understanding. As I understand it, decriminalization means making no law against it. Legalization means making laws about it that boil down to regulation. Thus, decriminalization is more free.

This article seems to be generally in line with my understanding: Example of making it worse: From what I gather, prostitution in Las Vegas is mostly run by the mafia and legalization has not led to women being free to be their own boss, set their own hours, etc.

Legalization of prostitution often means sex workers are subjected to a lot of rules and regulations such that it becomes akin to wage slavery rather than freedom to pursue work independently like a small business owner.

I will suggest Obamacare as another example of regulation making things worse. I'm quite poor and being hit with harsh financial penalties on my taxes this year for failing to have full coverage for all of last year. Prior to Obamacare, I could just forego having healthcare and the government did not get all up in my business about why I did that and whether or not I was allowed to do that, etc.

My support of decriminalization of prostitution comes from having read Working: My Life as a Prostitute by Dolores French.

Prior to becoming a prostitute, she was a political activist. The reason you get those google results is because your understanding is not consistent with how other people use the words. Your suggested usage is reasonable, but it's not the usage that is common, and I suggest that you change your understanding. Legalization has always meant "making it legal", which in most societies means "removing laws that make it illegal" though it might mean something different in North Korea, if you see what I mean.

Decriminalization is a wishy-washier idea, that includes lightening or removing criminal penalties, while potentially keeping other penalities. For example, changing indictable offenses to non-indictable offenses in the U. Prostitution should be legalized , not merely have the penalties lightened. And that alone is not sufficient; legal regimes that legalize the actual act of sex-for-money, but still force most prostitutes to hide from the cops I'm looking at Canadian law, here are still inadequate, because such regimes still victimize sex workers consensual or otherwise.

It's simply a human rights issue. I also think it's clear that some degree of regulation is desirable, but I think that reasonable people can disagree on this.

DoreenMichele 88 days ago. My understanding of the difference is rooted in the opinions of Dolores French who was a sex worker and political activist.

She advocated for decriminalization, not legalization, because it was more beneficial to sex workers. I find some articles that fit with that framework and some that don't. I don't think it's just me. It's a little more complicated than that. I do try to be mindful that the words get used inconsistently and I do try to make a point of clarifying my intended meaning.

I'm human and I don't always remember that this is an ongoing issue. I have provided both a link to an article that communicates my understanding of the topic as well as cited the original source where I got the info, plus stated as clearly as I can that googling it may lead to additional confusion because articles on the topic are contradictory. Some agree with my understanding. Some say the opposite. I have no idea whatsoever why that would be reason for you to turn this into a personal attack and justification for apparently your personal frustration with me.

My understanding is you are British. You could more charitably chalk up any communication difficulties between us to cultural differences and to being "separated by the same language. This is also basically the Portugal approach to drug control, which appears to be working. You think we would have learned with the experience from Prohibition to inform us I understand what you're saying.

However, compare sex work to slavery which it often is. Nobody wants to be a slave. Some desperate people might agree to be enslaved to pay off a debt.

You could say that if someone agrees to be enslaved, it's OK. But I'd argue that removing certain choices promotes freedom. If slavery is illegal, a person found with slaves can't force the slaves to say they agreed to this arrangement; the arrangement itself is illegal and the slave holder is always in the wrong.

I think treating prostitution the same way makes sense. People are free to sleep with whom they choose, but when it's done for money, it's far too easy for exploitation to occur. If we say it's always illegal, we remove the veneer of respectability that enables one person to exploit another "by agreement". Note that in both cases we should target the exploiter and not the victim. The point isn't "you can't be a slave", but "you can't enslave anyone. I would argue that the sea between "sex slavery" aaaand "sex worker" is just as vast as that between professional engineer and enslaved engineer.

Again, polite society would have you think otherwise Please can we call sex workers pleasure technicians? A pleasure engineer should require a degree By saying that a person can't voluntarily agree to become a slave, you are saying that you, not they, have the right to determine what happens to them. That is the essence of slavery right there.

By taking away their choice you are claiming ownership over them. You haven't eliminated slavery at all; you've just assumed the role of slave-owner yourself "for their own good", much as other slave owners throughout history have justified their actions by claiming that their slaves would be incapable of managing on their own as free individuals.

That is the essence of slavery right there I think you're being hyperbolic. It is not possible for all people to have all freedoms. My freedom to go where I want is limited by your freedom to decide who comes on your property.

Like it or not, we have to collectively draw boundaries that restrict some freedoms in order to preserve others. Some of these tradeoffs are tricky. If large numbers of people start protesting their inability to become slaves, I'll reconsider. Meanwhile, large numbers of people are currently being forced into slavery - See, this is the sort of contradiction inherent in the "positive rights" worldview. Positive "rights" are always in conflict, which is very convenient when you're looking for an excuse to pick and choose which rights other people have and not very useful as a framework for a stable society.

Negative rights, on the other hand, never conflict; there is really only one fundamental right, which is self-ownership: The only actions are out of bounds are those which would infringe on others' rights of self-ownership.

From this you can infer other rights like the freedom of speech, freedom of association, the right to privacy, and the right not to be enslaved against your will, and together with others you can cooperate to provide each other with things which, while desirable, are not rights, such as food, shelter, defense, gainful employment, and healthcare. And I agree that this is wrong.

The key difference is that these people were forced into slavery—it wasn't their choice. Obviously it's not a very attractive option under any circumstance, but one can easily imagine situations where the alternative might be worse.

If you need what someone else can provide, and have nothing else of sufficient value to barter for it, giving up your freedom might be a price you'd be willing to pay. No one else should presume to take that option from you. Putting aside the fact that it isn't your right which you're trading away, and consequently that this isn't your decision to make, it doesn't actually protect anyone. A person who was coerced into such a situation could simply say so, forcing the other party to prove that they had agreed to it in exchange for some form of consideration.

AFNobody 3 months ago. That logic makes pornography illegal. Most US sex workers fled CL and use Instagram now or any chat program that provides location distances. In other countries Weechat is the preferred method to find companions for hire. You'll also find countless escort ads in any adult social media hookup site like say, Fetlife or Adult Friend Finder. A warning to anybody thinking of building a gigantic illegal escort listing service or agency and hosting it in Russia or via Tor, imagine the massive effort to come after you in hopes they discover political rivals have been using your service.

This was interesting to me, so I researched a little. Apparently, the real volume of transactions has moved to https: As usual, the internet routes around censorship. Shutting down one avenue, just pushes these people back into the shadows where its going to be a LOT harder to track down and find them. With CL being up, it was public, traceable and arrests could be made discretely and out of public view.

Nothing should be demonized. Anything that hinders humanity should be regulated and monitored, proportional to the threat. That is all that is needed. Out of sight and out of mind enables thriving dark markets. To eliminate dark markets, the open market must be all inclusive. There needs to be only one market. For darker material, we need more aggressive inclusion tactics. For example, pedophilia should be considered an extremely dangerous disease. No one would ever be protected or cured or neutralized , and carriers would be hiding among us.

Well no we can't make the sex trade disappear, but we can certainly make it more difficult and by extension less prevalent. While I agree that the current measure is overblown, I do understand where the people behind the legislation are coming from.

Because something can be used for terrorism, like cars, ban all cars. That kind of mentality tends to come from reactionary conservatives in my experience. If it was legal, it could be better regulated, and they could operate with more safety While I'm in favor of decriminalizing adults engaging in adult behavior, I don't believe anyone goes into selling sex with a healthy attitude towards sex.

They're typically victims of sexual abuse at a young age, which has warped their perspective, leading them to believe that their biggest value is to sell their bodies for sex. Let me provide a few questions on prostitution: Readers of HN 1. Would you move to Nevada to work in your spare time as a legal prostitute? It's all the benefits of being an Uber driver, but with much better per-hour pay, no vehicle lease, and relatively no upkeep costs.

You get to chose the clients you service, but you have service. To offset the pain of moving, in addition to the money you make as a prostitute, you also get a sizable pay-raise for your day job. Not everyone can get a six-figure tech job, so the money and self sufficiency that affords is a good alternative to a low-paying entry-level position.

Your teenage child tells you they have decided to be a prostitute to save-for and pay for college. You've put away enough money for them, but they refuse to take it, and instead want to earn their way. Do you encourage them? What if you didn't have any money saved up?

Would you support their decision? My point of view isn't to demonize those who have gone into prostitution now, in the past, or in the future, but recognize that it's not a choice that pretty much any of us would make for ourselves, nor the ones we care about. My day job as a programmer in Silicon Valley already pays a lot, and I expect the pay to increase over time, but if the ratio of [prostitution pay] to [day job pay] was as high as it is for most people, then, yes, I think it'd make sense to do that.

If a whole lot of them did that, then I expect the price would drop a great deal, so such a campaign might be dishonest—well, actually, in some respects that is like a stereotype of a STEM campaign, with some companies bemoaning how hard it is to find talent while not raising their low wages.

Other than that concern, yeah, I'd be happy with such a campaign. I don't have children of my own yet, but I have sisters and a niece and female friends, so I will imagine them in that situation.

I would have two concerns: STDs and hard drug use. For the first, I would look up some statistics—e. For the second, I would make certain that my child a knew about the risks of various drugs, b was prepared to deal with pressure to take drugs, and c knew that she could leave at any time and come back home. After those concerns were addressed, yes, I would consider it an interesting experience for my child to have.

Lucrative, get to see a bunch of people in an unusual set of circumstances, probably get practice in negotiation and in reading people, etc. You could use the same argument against anything that groups of people consider "immoral". Alterations of the position: They're typically victims of religious indoctrination at a young age, which has warped their perception, leading them to believe in a false god" "While I'm in favor of people having freedom, I don't think anybody uses narcotics with a healthy attitude towards their health.

They're typically victims of immoral liberal households at a young age, which has warped their perception, leading them to believe that drugs are OK" Basically, you're making a moral decision and saying that anybody that ends up making a contrary decision for themselves must be damaged due to their upbringing. What morale decision am I making? There is a thin line between saying that very few people would make a choice, and very few people should make a choice.

You are correctly asserting that you said "would" not "should", but others are correctly pushing back and saying that it is a common rhetorical technique to say one when actually meaning the other.

If you meant what you said in a non-normative manner, you may need to emphasize this fact to prevent the more common reading. Separately, I'm sure some people question whether you are correct that few would choose this lifestyle, and if so, why this would be. Personally, I think you are right that few would choose to work as prostitutes but that the reason is the societal stigma associated with sex work.

I don't know how popular the choice would be if the stigma would be removed and the pay remained high. You seem to be asserting that it would remain extremely unpopular, but I'm not sure that's correct. Even if the stigma were removed, I think the years of human evolution which encourages men and women to pair-wise mate for life would make it hard on an emotional level for more people to provide sex as a service.

Outside of our biological needs, the health risks would be difficult to manage as well. Your contempt for their choices is bizarre and really offensive. If they have a better option, perhaps you could illustrate what that might be. Perhaps grab a coding job? Or waitressing, with all the benefits and pay that comes with and sexual harassment with no recourse, not much metoo for underpaid waitresses?

Or, are you offering a job? What benefits come with being a prostitute? If you're worried about sexual harassment with no recourse, picking a profession with astronomically higher risk of sexual violence would be the last choice any rational person would make.

You've built a strawman for my argument; I'm not showing contempt for the choice of picking prostitution; but I am saying that in the US engaging in it, as a seller or as a buyer constitutes being stupid. The increase risk of violence, sexual or otherwise, the risk to your families health, the risk to your own health, the risk to your career.

All reasons why it's stupid. I believe decriminalizing prostitution would reduce the risks--but regardless, those who go into prostitution will still be exploited, regardless of it's legal status. If it were decriminalized and remove it's social stigma I don't see more people becoming prostitutes.

What's that and who exactly defined it? And, as to who exactly, psychologists. From the Mental Help article: They convince themselves that prostitution is a choice and that none of the women they see are exploited. I would like to be confident that everyone I meet was able to get basic necessities like healthcare. Legalizing prostitution would open the door to reducing exploitation. Does the prostitute have a state issued sex worker ID?

Are you paying at least the state-mandated minimum? Did you pay via a certified escrow service that has strict requirements to watch for common signs of abuse? Compare that to what we have now, which is a total lack of transparency. Demand for sex is not going away. We need to prevent it from causing exploitation by creating a safe, legal option. My counter, if everyone had basic necessities met like health care, and universal basic income, would they choose to work as prostitutes?

Perhaps a certain kind of psychologist. Psychologists are not a monolithic block, and many would say that an individual's choice to pursue sex work could be "healthy" as long as it isn't causing them emotional distress or preventing them from living a fulfilling life. The "scorched earth" approach only gets support when the nature and scope of the issues are distorted.

What are the real issues in play? One is prostitution, a form of sex work which is illegal in most of the United States. The American public have varying feelings about its legal status, how enforcement should be carried out, etc.

Public opinion doesn't support measures which endanger sex workers which FOSTA does , because they're already an at-risk group. Public opinion is rightly massively against slavery in any form. What I would like to know is, how much slavery was taking place through the Craigslist personals section?

How much of it goes on in America? Can we get some real data injected into this discussion about the nature and the extent of actual forced sex labor? Scorched earth tactics might be appropriate if America has developed a serious slavery problem again , but they need to be justified with facts.

I've run across people who want to take a scorched earth approach to eradicating prostitution which will not work any more than the war on drugs did. They refer to all prostitution as trafficking in order to conflate the two issues, mislead the public and build support for their radical policies.

Neither of these agendas reflect public opinion. The thing is, while some people see it as a separate issue, there is a very common opinion deliberately fostered by the anti-prostitution lobby that prostitution is inherently and inalterably human trafficking, and invocation of the term "human trafficking" is now very commonly used as a cover for policies that are directed generally against prostitution, and not at either the place where human trafficking overlaps with prostitution and not at human trafficking unconnected to prostitution.

Thanks for the links! These Wikipedia articles demonstrate my point that the facts and data are very weak in the trafficking discussion, and that data is often misrepresented to exaggerate the size of the problem. The percentage of these related to sex is not mentioned. This statement is also erroneous. The GSI's estimate was for the number of people in some form of "modern slavery," which by their definition includes certain kinds of prison labor among other things, and is unrelated to whether they were trafficked.

The same formula is used for Switzerland, Sweden, Germany, etc. I'm not trying to detract from the importance of the issue of modern slavery but mentioning the 57k out of context seems a bit misleading, the US is literally among the best in the world in this area and the number is so rough that it could be off by tens of thousands.

And again, it has nothing to do with trafficking, let alone sex trafficking! Why aren't we doing better studies and getting better data about the problem it purports to solve? I'll probably get downvotes for this, but the Republican leadership is uninterested in facts. They are only interested in their agenda, and if facts get in the way, they will ignore them.

It got a lot worse when Newt Gingrich took the reigns in Congress in the 90's. Since Obama was elected, it's gone into hyperdrive. They fucking hated that man. Everyone is only interested in their agenda in politics, calling for additional research just happens to sometimes further a side's agenda. As of right now, the Democrats are the one's who want additional research in most situations, but that doesn't mean they want more research universally, and when studies have come back negatively as they sometimes do , they are disregarded.

That said, there does seem to be an overall lack of trust in the scientific method among the political right, the reasons behind which being a bit more complicated than political efficacy. Your comment brings to mind this article: I recommend giving it a read if you'd like your attitude challenged.

Illniyar 3 months ago. Actually prostitution is legal in Nevada but not in the big cities. So even that isn't so clear cut. Great point, I edited my comment to reflect this. Other countries have broader definitions.

Slavery is still legal in the USA according to the 13th Amendment. Here is a related WP article[1]. Retric 3 months ago. That number is pretending to be accurate the error bars are rediculus to have 3 digits. Yeah it seems too odd that the population percentage is 0. From safety1st's excellent comment: The scorched earth mentality says that if you're not in favor of gun-banning, you're pro-murder.

If you're not in favor of policing all of your user-generated content instantaneously and at significant cost, then you are pro-childporn and pro-child-sexual-exploitation.

When in fact, nothing could be further from the truth. The form of this is a false equivalency or perhaps the https: Which is a pretty bad consequence, IMHO. This also creates a law open to abuse: If you have a corporate enemy that permits user-generated content, simply anonymously post some objectionable content to their site, take a screenshot, and then alert the authorities with the URL and screenshot. It's like SWATting, except on a whole 'nother level!

Is Giphy really to blame in this fiasco? How are they somehow more to blame than the person who actually posted this? And to make the system better they just took the system offline. The next Craigs list will be on Tor and will have a child prostitute section. Congratulations on making things worse. There was at least one that was very popular around 5 years ago, but I don't remember the name. But you are absolutely right, this is pushing sex workers further underground and therefore making their lives more dangerous.

And now you'll have the "innocent" john sorting through ads selling any number of illegal offerings, because he will have to use the TOR version now. Can't help but think this will be a boon for those in the business of sex trafficking. Would it be surprising to say that trading in this might include Bitcoin?

Monero is the de facto standard currency in the deep web nowadays, not bitcoin. TeMPOraL 3 months ago. About as surprising as noticing that e. I'd imagine they would use Monero or Zcash nowadays since those are proven fairly more anonymized. Bitcoin is wholly public so all it takes is one identifiable wallet to start profiling addresses they interact with. You used to be able to tumble the bitcoins but cant realistically do it anymore due to high fees.

By Bitcoin I meant Blockchain based money. But I couldn't edit it later on. Unless they send you suitcase with human being and they don't expect them to get back with cash, then yes, it would be surprising.

But if people are content to swat away a problem until they can't see it anymore, despite that the ignored causes continues to generate more misery, then it's hard to be sympathetic to that defensible position.

Especially since a lot of people just lost access to romantic venues because a minority of users make a living through sex. Or that particular sites enable it? I think the point is: Bartweiss 3 months ago. Perhaps more directly - if we're trying to stop sex trafficking by shutting down the places where victims meet clients, we're going to have to ban streets.

Fjolsvith 3 months ago. Or why can't we ban churches because pastors can use them to rape or molest church members? Most monetary transactions involving victims of sex slaves involve money, should we remove it too?

He's saying that this affects far more legitimate users than sex traffickers by multiple orders of magnitude, while at the same time not preventing sex trafficking from taking place anyway. No, no, we don't ban money, we just move to systems where the government gets to monitor all your financial transactions in real time and they get to selectively block those they don't find morally wholesome.

End Prohibition of Sex Work Step 2. Stop Criminalizing Speech driving to further and further under ground were it is no longer tracable at all The "scorched earth" groups are in no way protecting victims, in fact they are making it WORSE by driving people to more shady platforms deep deep under ground, where law enforcement will be less likely to find information or victims.

End Prohibition of Sex Work All you have to do is study the laws of prostitution elsewhere in the world to understand that they have little to no influence on sex trafficking. Prostitution is legal, explicit, and even taxed in the Netherlands, but sex trafficking remains such a major problem that some large cities, like Utrecht, have outlawed prostitution locally to combat the issue. It may not end sex trafficking but legalising prostitution lowers harm levels on workers, but allowing them to seek medical care and police protection without risk of incarceration.

There is no down-side to legalisation as many would say for drugs, as it allows problems to have legal solutions. I'm not in disagreement with you about legalization of prostitution in general, but with regards specifically to sex trafficking, there is much evidence from several countries that legalization actually makes sex trafficking worse -- most likely due to increased demand for a service anyone can enjoy legally.

Could you cite some of this evidence? The issue comes up quite often in the local papers here in the Netherlands. Some other commenters here have pointed to some other reports from other countries. You get those same benefits if you keep buying sex illegal but decriminalise selling. Some workers of the business in the Netherlands argue that the end of prohibition worsened conditions.

Prostitution in the Netherlands and Drugs in Portugal seem to be the main ones. I assume things got worse because cowardly assholes are now allowed to treat the prostitutes disrespectfully. Before, the assholes that were afraid of the law wouldn't risk going to a prostitute. Now that the law won't hurt them, they go and are demanding disrespectful assholes.

Implying that there is some uptick in people who are "allowed to treat the prostitutes disrespectfully" in well-regulated societies is intellectually disingenuous. HelloNurse 3 months ago. Abuse in a brothel involves an idiot, a prostitute and a lot of other people possibly including bouncers , while abuse of a street walker involves only an idiot, a prostitute and a lonely place.

Guess what's easier to perpetrate, regardless of legality. The likelihood of customers that [would] make derogatory comments post encounter goes up. While the ratio is the same the hard number of negative feedback is 3 times greater. And psychologically negative feedback has much more weight that positive feedback which can weigh on an person's self-confidence and feeling of self-worth.

Thank you for the reply and insight. My point is, there are more people now openly able and willing to approach prostitutes who think "shut up and do what I say because I'm paying you [you low life worthless being who has to sell you body to make a living]". I'm not saying all people who use or are okay with prostitution think this, just that the supply of people who think this and act this way now find themselves able to openly go to prostitutes where as the law, and fear of it, kept these assholes from using prostitutes before.

What does this have to do with the discussion at hand? If your point is that some percentage of people are assholes who look down on others and that more people means more assholes overall, then this is already well understood. How this clarifies the topic at hand or in any way furthers the discussion is missing.

Someone said they heard legalization made conditions worse. I was merely offering up an opinion of why that might be, if true.

Where are "closet" rude and mean people more likely to make degrading and derogatory comments? In public in front of others where their socially unacceptable behavior food service employees would be exposed?

Or behind closed doors with a single individual where they can freely say shit making the other feel small and themselves feel big? Sorry, I forgot anecdotes, metaphors, and hypotheses are not allowed on HN. I'm truly sorry I wasn't able to effectively and clearly communicate how the dots connect. Noos 3 months ago.

It got worse because no one wants to be a prostitute, and there has always been a strong coercive element to women entering that profession.

When you legalize, you increase demand while the supply is still capped, so coercion rises to compensate. So the same "coercive element" could be said and has been said to drive people to enter any field of employment making all work for wages "coercive" by nature. Where does the coercion appear? Thank you for replying. I'm sure you want the police and laws there to protect children from sexual exploitation.

The same with drugs, you don't want smack and cocaine being sold in Boots. So there has to be a law, and that law is going to be too restrictive for some people and too lenient for others. The laws and implementation of them swings back and forth all throughout time.

We protect children from all manner of things because their brains have not formed to the point where we as a society believe they can make rational choices for themselves However if we are going to have a free society at some point you become an adult, at which point I do not believe the government should act as a parent over your life making choices as to what is "best" for you Allowing for that type of government means you lose self agency and your liberty. Not sure what a boot is, in American English a boot is a type of shoe, I dont really know if I care that people sell drugs out of their shoes Aside from that, Yes I believe "smack", cocaine, and every other drug should be legal to sell to adults.

The government has not business telling an adult what food, drink or drugs they are allowed or not allowed to take. At most the government has an responsibility to enforce quality, and truthful advertisement laws i. In fact, Boots is now owned by Walgreens. It's official company name now is Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc but it's Walgreens who bought all the shares of Boots. I believe 'the boot' is a British term for the trunk of an automobile, which I think fits the bill here: The context is the British pharmacy "Boots" - think Walgreens.

The parent commenter's argument is that our society at large does not want heroin and coke sold at the corner drugstore. They want these substances out of sight, out of mind. It's all very well for us to imagine legalized drugs would be safer and more easy to regulate, but a majority of people disagree - so for the time being, they will continue being sold out of the boots of cars. TheGrassyKnoll 3 months ago. Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc.

Taxed and regulated the same as alcohol and tobacco. Start by legalizing prostitution and removing the black market. That won't end all trafficking, but will end a lot and will make it much easier to go after the remaining illegal black market as it's now been separated from the legal market. Comment about how people who don't learn are doomed to repeat history here.

How many black markets for harmless everyday goods and services do we need to ban before the idiots in charge start to understand these simple principles? They're constantly talking about markets, but clearly no one in government understands the first thing about them. Or, more likely, doesn't want to.

It's much easier to hide illegally activity that mirrors legal activity than it is to hide illegal activity where all the surrounding paraphernalia is direct evidence. Your assertion that legalisation of prostitution will lead to less trafficking of people seems naive to me - you create a larger market and allow people to easily hide. You bring forth a compelling theory, but I don't think it's true. Compare the market for contraband or counterfeited booze and cigarettes, which "mirrors" legal booze and cigarettes, with the market for cocaine and heroin, where "all the surrounding paraphernalia is direct evidence".

OK, go on, if someone is smoking an illegally imported cigarette it's nearly impossible to tell just by looking that there's been a crime. If they're doing a line you know within a small error margin without any investigation.

Why, because the former is hidden by the legally allowed behaviour. No, you can't tell if a given cigarette being smoked is contraband or not, but buying a pack of smuggled cigarettes is a very different experience from buying a legal pack. Even a conscientious customer has very few options to check for themselves.

If brothels on the other hand are legal, operators have every incentive to do this, and if anyone is looking for an illegal brothel which looks very different from a legal one, just like the place you're buying smuggled smokes looks very different from a , this "paraphernalia" is direct evidence that they're looking for something bad.

Sure, but the question is about the relative sizes of the markets and the amount of involuntary suffering involved. While I admittedly did not look up any hard data, I take it for granted that the cocaine market is much more of a public problem than the smuggled cigarette market.

This flies in the face of your admittedly compelling thought experiment. Siblings have made some compelling points regarding why that might be. Legal cigarettes cap the profits that can be had from illegal cigarette trade. With cocaine, you can charge x production costs. This creates incentives that are sure to produce an endless supply of dealers, regardless of how draconian enforcement is.

It would probably also create a boom in prostitution - with the accompanying drawbacks. Job Cohen, the former mayor of Amsterdam lamented in crime organizations and human traffickers taking advantage of their lax prostitution laws. You know that you can have consensual sexual relationships outside of marriage, right? They don't even have to be exclusive. Seriously, dude, if you're a "hungry man", open Tinder or just go to a local hook up bar.

Hooking up for a one night stand is trivial. I look repulsive and my personality isn't much better. Hookups are quite out of the question. But it must be nice to be attractive and have enough money to go out clubbing. Stop being such a goddamned quitter. Dressing well is the least important. Other people are happy to do it for you. If I can meet biological needs like eating by paying some one and not having to hunt and farm, why shouldn't I have the option of doing the same with sex?

If you want to, go for it. But feeling that you are charmless and ugly is unpleasant even if you can buy sex. These are problems that are at worst, and I do mean worst, ameliorable. If you tell yourself those things often enough, which frankly sound like what other people have said about you in the past, eventually you start to believe them as fact.

Both looks and personality can be improved upon, even if you are on a budget. Perhaps the commenter was merely making a point but no doubt your advice is invaluable. Glad you've been lucky, but don't make assumptions from data set of 1.

It's trivial only for the most attractive and charismatic males. OkCupid has published some nice research on it. Luckily charisma can be learned and overcome all but the most outlying unattractive. But yea prostitution is the world's oldest profession for a reason - sometimes people just want a transactional sexual encounter.

For money, one can have no "equal parts" requirement - no need to reciprocate. It's not for everyone or for me but I can understand the attraction.

Some people can indeed easily attract casual sexual partners in a matter of minutes or hours in almost any environment. But the vast majority of the population cannot. It all depends on how do you agree upon this. I've been married, and I've been in open and polyamorous relationships, and difference is enormous.

Frondo 3 months ago. Of course it can. Someone might want to have sex with you, and consent, and then they might want you to stop, and remove consent for you to continue. Continuing sex with someone after they tell you to stop, no matter what they said before, is sexual assault.

Well, yes it can. You have to dismiss massive amounts of male testimonies to say that consent has never ever been removed after the fact. The idea that there's a recurring massive problem of false convictions for rape is bizarre.

In most countries it's extremely difficult to get alleged rape prosecuted in the first place and the conviction rate is low. I'm not going to dispute that it might have happened in some cases but it's a comparatively rare problem. Also, I'm going to assume you're not a native English speaker - the contrasting group nouns should be "men" and "women" not "males" and "girls".

This parenthetical is an odd leap. Perhaps it was meant to suggest that the author who is certainly fluent in, if not a native speaker of, English shouldn't use the word girls to refer to women? No, its more like the Salem witch hunt. You mean, like millions of illegal immigrants who are working in farming, construction, fast food, and many other industries?

How do you feel about scorched earth approach to those? Apparently trading your body for sex is somehow metaphysically different to trading your body for labor. It most certainly is for an indeterminate number of people. PurpleBoxDragon 3 months ago. But if you suggest to legalize and regulate it as a means of protecting those who don't wish to participate, you will be seen as a demonic entity who is advocating for sex crimes to be legalized.

I don't think one can defend a crusade that so easily and extremely ignores alternative solutions. I suspect a lot of the push is from very conservative or sex negative views who see this as an opening to roll back some of the recently won sexual freedoms.

TallGuyShort 3 months ago. It works both ways with different issues. Generally speaking every political discussion has degraded into accusing the other side of killing children. How can you compare being the victim of misdesigned automated system, who has no conscience and follows blind rules, to being the victim of a trafficker who has full understanding and responsibility for what he's doing and exploiting a mindless computer system designed for an entirely different purpose?

Now I agree we as a society should recognize that some tools, in the hands of the criminal, sociopath or insane can do a lot of harm, and it's fair to move and restrict them.

High explosives, nuclear material, anonymous banking are all examples of technologies that, while useful, can and should be restricted.

Literally to the tune of "we should be burning down craigslist entirely, and yahoo, .. There was a time when Brothels advertised in newspapers in lesser read sections. .. You'll also find countless escort ads in any adult social media hookup site like say It's not like sex work is even legal in the majority of western nations. West Virginia University. John Tripp . study. In section 5, we present results of the effect of Craigslist's ERS on prostitution. 4While Bass .. date because this is the last year Craigslist entered any city in our sample This gives us. month. As i understand it in Nevada you can only go to brothels for prostitution and they are heavily regulated They can advertise just like any other business does. Look at alcohol in the US compared to other Western nations.

Craigslist eny west brothel

HOOKUP APPS HOOKUPS FOR SEX MELBOURNE