Describing this guy as being “Arrested in Human Trafficking Sting” carries a different connotation than “Arrested in Prostitution Sting.” While both are technically true, the former suggests that he was on the supply side and not the demand side. It’s an unusual way to describe the events, given current language usage.
Maybe it is a better way to describe such an operation, because it clearly outlines sex workers as victims instead of criminals, and because (you’re absolutely right) very many sex workers are being trafficked to one degree or another.
Still, trying to reduce demand with such a sting by punishing the customers of “the world’s oldest profession” is an ill-conceived solution. There are more victims of human trafficking because sex work is illegal. Sex work being illegal makes it more dangerous for everyone involved, prevents sex workers and their clients from reporting crimes (whether those are property or violent crimes), transfers much more of the value of the work away from the worker and over to the “owner” (to put it in Marxist terms), limits sex worker access to healthcare (because they don’t have employer subsidized insurance), reduces the tax base, and creates a sense of “higher crime” in places where these operations take place. For what? Because it’s “icky”?
If you (not you, but the generic “you”) really want to have an impact on human trafficking, as well as many other kinds of crime which are endemic to black markets, you should be in favor of legalizing sex work. Part of the reason marijuana is being widely legalized in the US and elsewhere is because in and of itself, it does not infringe on human or animal rights, and except for its being illegal, it does not present a public health or safety concern.
In short: If it’s not hurting anyone, it mustn’t be illegal. If it is illegal, it’s still not hurting anyone. The black market that rises and the response to it do things which hurt people. More crime, real crime, requires more police. And more - as well as more military - tools and weapons to prosecute crime. Those tools and weapons, fear of them, and fear of the additional crime, are too often used against fully law-abiding people.
Sex work being illegal hurts everyone, including people who think its icky.
No, the apologist who tried to diminish the corruption of the rightwing asshole is correct. You were calling out a piece of shit for being a hypocrite when we all already know that they’re hypocrites. /s
Lol wtf is this shitty kind of thinking? The waiter who served you at the restaurant you last ate could be a victim of human trafficking too.
If he knew they were trafficked, then sure, arrest him and charge him. Otherwise, he’s no more guilty of anything immoral than you were eating at the last restaurant you went to
I didn’t say it was immoral. I’m advocating legalizing it all to eliminate the black market for it. When drugs and prostitution are legalized, there’s more transparency and oversight, reducing opportunities for bad actors.
This is just a prostitute sting. Calling this “being involved with human trafficking” is just click bait
Yes, because we all know that prostitutes are never victims of human trafficking. Stupid clickbait.
Describing this guy as being “Arrested in Human Trafficking Sting” carries a different connotation than “Arrested in Prostitution Sting.” While both are technically true, the former suggests that he was on the supply side and not the demand side. It’s an unusual way to describe the events, given current language usage.
Maybe it is a better way to describe such an operation, because it clearly outlines sex workers as victims instead of criminals, and because (you’re absolutely right) very many sex workers are being trafficked to one degree or another.
Still, trying to reduce demand with such a sting by punishing the customers of “the world’s oldest profession” is an ill-conceived solution. There are more victims of human trafficking because sex work is illegal. Sex work being illegal makes it more dangerous for everyone involved, prevents sex workers and their clients from reporting crimes (whether those are property or violent crimes), transfers much more of the value of the work away from the worker and over to the “owner” (to put it in Marxist terms), limits sex worker access to healthcare (because they don’t have employer subsidized insurance), reduces the tax base, and creates a sense of “higher crime” in places where these operations take place. For what? Because it’s “icky”?
If you (not you, but the generic “you”) really want to have an impact on human trafficking, as well as many other kinds of crime which are endemic to black markets, you should be in favor of legalizing sex work. Part of the reason marijuana is being widely legalized in the US and elsewhere is because in and of itself, it does not infringe on human or animal rights, and except for its being illegal, it does not present a public health or safety concern.
In short: If it’s not hurting anyone, it mustn’t be illegal. If it is illegal, it’s still not hurting anyone. The black market that rises and the response to it do things which hurt people. More crime, real crime, requires more police. And more - as well as more military - tools and weapons to prosecute crime. Those tools and weapons, fear of them, and fear of the additional crime, are too often used against fully law-abiding people.
Sex work being illegal hurts everyone, including people who think its icky.
I 100% thought this meant he was controlling the trafficking, not just a customer.
Lots of “journalists” have decided it’s acceptable to make subtle adjustments to their headlines to fit a narrative.
Yeah, doesn’t seem to reputable to me. And lying headlines like this means they probably never will be.
No, the apologist who tried to diminish the corruption of the rightwing asshole is correct. You were calling out a piece of shit for being a hypocrite when we all already know that they’re hypocrites. /s
So are many nail salons. Are people getting their nails done, human traffickers?
Lol wtf is this shitty kind of thinking? The waiter who served you at the restaurant you last ate could be a victim of human trafficking too.
If he knew they were trafficked, then sure, arrest him and charge him. Otherwise, he’s no more guilty of anything immoral than you were eating at the last restaurant you went to
Until prostitution is legalized and regulated, there is a higher risk of it being trafficking than not.
Higher than not? You’re totally making that up.
And buying drugs has a high risk of funding cartels and human trafficking. Doesn’t make buying and using drugs immoral.
I didn’t say it was immoral. I’m advocating legalizing it all to eliminate the black market for it. When drugs and prostitution are legalized, there’s more transparency and oversight, reducing opportunities for bad actors.
Ok, so if it’s not immoral, you don’t see any wrong with the headline?
It’s misleading.
To me, I thought he was involved in running the trafficking ring, not just a customer.