View Full Version : ruhama on the radio...
i was tuned into Pat Kenny interviewing ruhama's Geraldine Rowley.
apparantly, a report was released about the affects of the Swedish model.
Geraldine dismissed much of it as rubbish.
Pat Kenny was assertive with her, but forever the gentleman. she said
they wanted to focus on the demand side. Kenny duly pointed out that
where there is unfullfilled demand-someone will create a supply. "hugely"
was Geraldine's reply?
there are going to be constitutional challenges with this as yet unformulated law.
to give one party impunity, whilst criminalising the other is not afforded under
our law. she denied it had been a failure in Sweden. she said they wanted to prevent
the mass abuse of people-i thought that was particularily ironic given ruhama's origins.
she said there would now commence six months of open debate about
the matter. she said "everyone's entitled to an opinion" thanks, Geraldine.
rubberlover
18-10-11, 10:51
Yep entitled to an opinion, which will be ignored if it doesn’t suit thier agenda.
If anything this style of law will only lead to more underground activity and put the girls in an even worse position.
When oh when will we get mature.
Sex happens, and some girls "Choose" this profession and are savvy in what they do. Would it not be more important to have this legalised and offer proper care and protection to the escorts, by way of health clinics, Garda protection etc etc etc, sorry if this is old ground, but it is sad we are still stuck in the 50's re this issue.
experiencedguy
18-10-11, 11:50
Yep entitled to an opinion, which will be ignored if it doesn’t suit thier agenda.
If anything this style of law will only lead to more underground activity and put the girls in an even worse position.
When oh when will we get mature.
Sex happens, and some girls "Choose" this profession and are savvy in what they do. Would it not be more important to have this legalised and offer proper care and protection to the escorts, by way of health clinics, Garda protection etc etc etc, sorry if this is old ground, but it is sad we are still stuck in the 50's re this issue.
Agreed, on all points. There is no system where the abuse of people isn't completely eradicated. A lot of workers get abused by their boss etc etc. I know this is not the same, but it's just something to bear in mind when people try to eliminate abuse completely.
This law will not work, as if there is a demand, there will always be a supply. You cannot hope to eliminate demand with a law (human nature being what it is), and if Ruhama had done their homework and listened to those involved rather than had their own agenda, the would have realised this a long time ago. Paying for sex is not unethical if nobody gets hurt and there is mutual respect. This law will marginalise escorts even more.
The only obstacles I can see in relation to legalising paying for sex are:
1: Religious
2: Polictical
1: I'm sure my childhood imaginary friend doesn't care less what I do with my money, much less the celestial teapot in the sky, and those that believe in a celestial teapot should have more sense than to foist off their moral arguments on me, rather than try to convince me that the teapot thinks what I'm doing is 'wrong'.
2: Politicians are, at the core, supposed to serve the people. What better way to serve al the people by bringing in more taxes? On the issue of taxing escorts I think I am a little uneducated, I will readily admit, but I am currently of the opinion that a lot of escorts either don't pay tax or don't declare the full amount they earn. On the escorts side, the can declare a lot of expenses..... I stand to be corrected, however, just be nice! :) The disadvantage here is that politicians will never do something for the good if it will harm their chances of re-election. The only hope is to have a group that properly represents escorts and punters, and Ruhama isn't it. In fact, they seem to be doing more harm than good for the business.
About trafficking: Would having escorts and punters having an open line to the police without fear of criminalisation not be MORE beneficial in the cases of reporting suspected trafficking? There would be a more solid basis for reporting, and also court evidence if the punter or escort was not in fear of the law.
So, what's wrong with a Australian and New Zealand based system, where it's legal?
Ruhamma and the TORL had been very vocal prior to the general elections and had a promise from current Minister of Justice Alan Shater that he would enact their proposed Swedish model if Labour came to power. They (Ruhamma + TORL) seemed less vocal over the last few months and I wondered if the economy had silenced all other lobies (or maybe I was just distracted?).
However, they are back in full force.:angryfire: I understand they have actually made a presentation to the senate. And from what I can gather the senate seems duped or complicit with their lies. They have equated tracfficking with escorting. And keep saying it is not just women but also chidren. They have played their game very well, pandering to peoples' emotions rather than focussing on the big picture. While there should be zero tolerance for trafficking, clearly this is not representative of the escorting industry in Ireland at large.
It is a very unfair battle. The TORL and Ruhamma are very well funded (government and EU funding) and have the veneer of ultimate respectability. They therefore have a very public face and an open forum. Unfortunately, due to the marked social stigma associated with the industry, the TOBL doesn't have the same level of acceptance in public forums. Furthermore, which escort would risk destroying her anonymity (and therefore her private life)? And for that matter which of us punters would be able to do the same. For staters us punters are considered the lowest form of life by the TORL and their supporters (and by society at large, dare I say).
I am extremely discouraged and frustrated by the inequity of this debate on the proposed legislation.:mad:
About trafficking: Would having escorts and punters having an open line to the police without fear of criminalisation not be MORE beneficial in the cases of reporting suspected trafficking? There would be a more solid basis for reporting, and also court evidence if the punter or escort was not in fear of the law.
So, what's wrong with a Australian and New Zealand based system, where it's legal?
I couldn't agree more experiencedguy. But you are preaching to the converted here. It's the general population who are duped and bombarded by Ruhamma's lies.
max california
18-10-11, 23:53
Their recent conference that they invited the Senators to and convinced them to support this proposal was supposed to be independent and unbiased. Only police forces from countries where clients are criminalised invited, no oficers from New Zealand, Germany etc.
The key to tackling Ruhama is in their own reports, the statistics there in show that trafficking for non sexual sectors is a multiple of that for sexual sector, so to enact legislation that might arguably prevent the trafficking of 38 out of thousands suspected trafficking cases is ludicrous. The demand is from the indentured slave markets as the Examiner recently called them and if there is to be a debate on preventing trafficking then lets move it to the real areas where it is worst. That will make their proposed criminalization seem unjust, unnecessary, and ultimately wrong.