I also think that there's a huge grey area here. It's not just black and white, either she's a strong, independent woman who just likes sex and chooses to make money off of this or else she's a victimized woman who's been trafficked and handcuffed to a bed while being forced to have sex with strangers for 14 hours a day. Just like not all rape is a scary stranger grabbing you off the street and assaulting you in a dark alley, there's a continuum between the women are doing it 100% involuntarily and would escape the second they were able and the women who are doing it 100% voluntarily and love their job.
The 14 year old selling her body on the streets may not have a pimp and may say she's doing it voluntarily, but is that really, completely the case? Is a 14 year old even capable of making that clear decision?
New Research Demolishes the Stereotype of the Underage Sex Worker
To calculate their population estimate, the John Jay team first culled the interview subjects who didn't fit the study's criteria but had been included for the potential referrals they could generate. The next step was to tally the number of times the remaining 249 subjects had been arrested for prostitution and compare that to the total number of juvenile prostitution arrests in state law-enforcement records. Using a mathematical algorithm often employed in biological and social-science studies, Ric Curtis and his crew were able to estimate that 3,946 youths were hooking in New York.
David Finkelhor, director of the Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire, calls the New York study significant, in that it "makes the big [national] numbers that people put out — like a million kids, or 500,000 kids — unlikely."
Researchers Ric Curtis and Meredith Dank induced hundreds of New York's underage sex workers to open up about their "business." Their findings upended the conventional wisdom — and galled narrow-minded advocates.
Curtis and Dank relied upon a method of social networking that was anything but electronic: Interview subjects were given coupons to pass out to peers and collected $10 for each successful referral.
Finkelhor's single caveat: While RDS is efficient in circulating through a broad range of social networks, certain scenarios might elude detection — specifically, foreign children who might be held captive and forbidden to socialize.
Still, says Finkelhor, "I think [the study] highlights important components of the problem that don't get as much attention: that there are males involved and that there are a considerable number of kids who are operating without pimps."
The John Jay study's authors say they were surprised from the start at the number of boys who came forward. In response, Dank pursued new avenues of inquiry — visiting courthouses to interview girls who'd been arrested and canvassing at night with a group whose specialty was street outreach to pimped girls. She and Curtis also pressed their male subjects for leads.
"It turns out that the boys were the more effective recruiter of pimped girls than anybody else," Curtis says. "It's interesting, because this myth that the pimps have such tight control over the girls, that no one can talk to them, is destroyed by the fact that these boys can talk to them and recruit them and bring them to us. Obviously, the pimps couldn't have that much of a stranglehold on them."
The same, of course, might be true of the elusive foreign-born contingent Finkelhor mentions.
Curtis and Dank believe there is, indeed, a foreign sub-population RDS could not reach. But with no data to draw on, it's impossible to gauge whether it's statistically significant or yet another overblown stereotype.
And as the researchers point out, the John Jay study demolished virtually every other stereotype surrounding the underage sex trade.
For the national study, researchers now are hunting for underage hookers in Las Vegas, Dallas, Miami, Chicago, and the San Francisco area, and interviews for an Atlantic City survey are complete.
Curtis is reluctant to divulge any findings while so much work remains to be done, but he does say early returns suggest that the scarcity of pimps revealed by the New York study appears not to be an anomaly.
A final report on the current research is scheduled for completion in mid-2012.
A parent or family member can also be a pimp, and can be less controlling. I went to college with a girl who's mother sold her from drugs from the time she was 12. She was allowed to go to school and be social, but she would come home and her mom would have some guy there waiting to buy her in exchange for drugs. I'm not saying that this is what's happening with all of these girls who don't have pimps, but just that it can and does happen.
Team Mer/TTT/Caden. My 14 year old "wants" to be a sex worker? Time to call a therapist.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I747 using proboards
Yeah, this is where I can't go.
Of course, the real world of sex work, because it's illegal, isn't just fun and money, but, let's pretend for a moment, that it's regulated, women are protected, no pimps, etc, the goal when we're talking about what sex work *should* look like. A 14 year old may think sex is good and enjoyable (even if she's a virgin) and think that getting paid for good enjoyable sounds like a good idea. It's not necessarily a sign for therapy. At 18, she may decide it's still getting paid for something enjoyable, but has a deeper level of understanding (i don't mean that she knows it means violence and pimps and trafficking). She may decide it's not as fun as she thought it would be and doesn't pursue it. Or, eyes more fully open, she still makes a conscious decision to do it. The only that would make her damaged is if we have an inherent feeling that sex work itself is a bad thing.
I'll go back to the military or truck driving thing. It's a legit career. It's not something I *want* for my hypothetical child. I would probably do my best to encourage different directions. But if my child said she wanted to drive trucks for a living, I wouldn't say it was time for therapy. I might be disappointed, I might not think it safe, but I would say the kid had emotional issues to be resolved.
How does conflating sex work and sex trafficking allow people to dismiss trafficking? To me it seems like the opposite - if it's a perfectly legitimate choice of work for anyone, including 12 year olds, why do we need to be so concerned about it? It allows people to say "well, what's the big deal? She chose to be a prostitute."
Because being trafficked isn't a choice? Maybe I'm not being clear here...
So if you were trafficked five years ago and then let go, but you continue selling sex, is that your choice? Are you a victim or not?
Not just that, but as an overall societal attitude, if we widely promote the idea that being a prostitute is a perfectly legit and uncontroversial occupation, then frankly, people aren't going to care that much about women being trafficked because they'll rationalize "well, they chose that, so..."
I also think that there's a huge grey area here. It's not just black and white, either she's a strong, independent woman who just likes sex and chooses to make money off of this or else she's a victimized woman who's been trafficked and handcuffed to a bed while being forced to have sex with strangers for 14 hours a day. Just like not all rape is a scary stranger grabbing you off the street and assaulting you in a dark alley, there's a continuum between the women are doing it 100% involuntarily and would escape the second they were able and the women who are doing it 100% voluntarily and love their job.
The 14 year old selling her body on the streets may not have a pimp and may say she's doing it voluntarily, but is that really, completely the case? Is a 14 year old even capable of making that clear decision?
I agree. And I'm with Caden, at that age their brains are still developing so making a choice is not necessarily on the same level as a fully fledged adult. Which is one of the reasons why, regardless of whether or not prostitution becomes legal, I will never, ever be okay with children being able to as well.
Because being trafficked isn't a choice? Maybe I'm not being clear here...
So if you were trafficked five years ago and then let go, but you continue selling sex, is that your choice? Are you a victim or not?
Not just that, but as an overall societal attitude, if we widely promote the idea that being a prostitute is a perfectly legit and uncontroversial occupation, then frankly, people aren't going to care that much about women being trafficked because they'll rationalize "well, they chose that, so..."
Of course you're still a victim. And the choice to continue is obviously predicated upon your history.
I guess I don't see things the same way, that legalized prostitution or the idea that prostitution can be a choice would lead to apathy in regard to sex trafficking. But you may be right since it's pretty much just hypothetical at this point.
I agree, but, tbf, we were called slut shamers last week so I can give a little leeway with such sarcasm/snark in this thread.
That was also done seriously. It was done in the spirit of calling out bigotry. Some people were in fact engaging in slut shaming.
Bunny people are sarcastic all the time here and you know it--I've seen posters be down right rude to each other in the middle of posts and we've all just let it slide on by so I'm not exactly sure why you're scolding me here with one sarcastic remark---but hey--start with the small changes.
:oh shit: there was just another sarcastic remark.
Honestly--I disagree with that--and I'm clearly NOT the only one--but that seems to be the expert answer!
Girl I am friends with and live next to an expert and that is NOT the answer. We had a long discussion after the last big ass thread about that on here. I will choose to believe the person I know who is very familiar with trafficking here and abroad and is currently boarding a plane where he will risk his life to save these young people
I agree, but, tbf, we were called slut shamers last week so I can give a little leeway with such sarcasm/snark in this thread.
That was also done seriously. It was done in the spirit of calling out bigotry. Some people were in fact engaging in slut shaming.
I know it was done seriously. It was also done wrongly and to stop rational discussion. So, I will just leave it at that as I think you are incorrect in your assertion here. I mean, here is an example---pedophile enabling? See, that is wrong and discussion stopping as it pertains to arbor's post.
Not just that, but as an overall societal attitude, if we widely promote the idea that being a prostitute is a perfectly legit and uncontroversial occupation, then frankly, people aren't going to care that much about women being trafficked because they'll rationalize "well, they chose that, so..."
I completely disagree. Being in the military is a legit occupation. That doesn't mean we condone child soldiers or mercenaries (KBR/Haliburton aside). We think being a house cleaner or a nanny is a legit occupation, but we don't condone indentured servitude. It's really pretty freaking easy to make such distinctions.
Not just that, but as an overall societal attitude, if we widely promote the idea that being a prostitute is a perfectly legit and uncontroversial occupation, then frankly, people aren't going to care that much about women being trafficked because they'll rationalize "well, they chose that, so..."
I completely disagree. Being in the military is a legit occupation. That doesn't mean we condone child soldiers or mercenaries (KBR/Haliburton aside). We think being a house cleaner or a nanny is a legit occupation, but we don't condone indentured servitude. It's really pretty freaking easy to make such distinctions.
Really? How much outrage is there in this country right now about child soldiers or indentured servitude?
I agree with this. I think arbor was pointing out that not at 12-14-year-olds are trafficked.
I get that, but they shouldn't be able to and any even hint that they choose this, as if they are mentally prepared, is appalling and gross.
ITA. I'm completely appalled that there are people that think a 12 year old can choose to be a sex worker. If children can "choose" this line of work, how will pedophiles be charged? Skeezy adults are going to be saying "she wanted it, I didn't do anything wrong."
I know my view of sex work is clouded by what sex means to me, but to think that there are "researchers" and others out there that think sex work is a valid choice for children, makes me want to weep.
Really? Our level of outrage is the measure now? If we're going by that, I'd say a lot of people aren't particularly outraged about sex trafficking, either. We americans have very little giveashit ability when it comes to things that don't directly affect us.
So, if there's no outrage about child soldiers, we must think it's totally cool. Is that really what you're saying, ttt?
Why is saying someone is appalled or it is disgusting for one to insinuate they are a-ok with underage sex workers wrong or beneath us? THe age is the issue, tied in with the act, not the act itself. It is really not a hard concept here.
I know it was done seriously. It was also done wrongly and to stop rational discussion. So, I will just leave it at that as I think you are incorrect in your assertion here. I mean, here is an example---pedophile enabling? See, that is wrong and discussion stopping as it pertains to arbor's post.
I am just sorry it didn't make anyone think again about their positions. Don't we tell people who think gay marriage is wrong that they are being bigoted?
I think that is a big assumption. Plus, I don't think the thoughts are anywhere near gay marriage discussions.
Really? Our level of outrage is the measure now? If we're going by that, I'd say a lot of people aren't particularly outraged about sex trafficking, either. We americans have very little giveashit ability when it comes to things that don't directly affect us.
So, if there's no outrage about child soldiers, we must think it's totally cool. Is that really what you're saying, ttt?
I'm saying that if you want people to care even less about sex trafficking than they currently do, promoting the idea that sex work is a perfectly legitimate and uncontroversial occupation, even for children, is a great way to do it.
Really? Our level of outrage is the measure now? If we're going by that, I'd say a lot of people aren't particularly outraged about sex trafficking, either. We americans have very little giveashit ability when it comes to things that don't directly affect us.
So, if there's no outrage about child soldiers, we must think it's totally cool. Is that really what you're saying, ttt?
I'm saying that if you want people to care even less about sex trafficking than they currently do, promoting the idea that sex work is a perfectly legitimate and uncontroversial occupation, even for children, is a great way to do it.
No one is advocating it's a legitimate occupation for children.
I'm saying that if you want people to care even less about sex trafficking than they currently do, promoting the idea that sex work is a perfectly legitimate and uncontroversial occupation, even for children, is a great way to do it.
No one is advocating it's a legitimate occupation for children.
Wrong.
ETA: Actually, that's not right (what I said above). Perhaps not in favor of underage sex workers, but still of the belief they can be cognizant enough to decide that's what they really and honestly want to do to earn a wage. Which shows absolutely no concept of the maturity level and brain function of teens and pre-teens.
No one is advocating it's a legitimate occupation for children.
Wrong.
I suppose my reading comprehension may be lacking, but I've only seen people arguing that it's possible that there are kids out there who make the choice (not that it's okay or healthy or wise). Not that they should make that choice, or be allowed to legally make that choice. I'm pretty sure that part of it is a Unity Horse.
Post by iammalcolmx on Feb 2, 2013 15:25:41 GMT -5
This thread went off the deep end when it was suggested kids could consent and willingly be sex workers. If anyone doesn't like my responses they can ignore them as I do other ridiculous shit I see on here.
Post by foundmylazybum on Feb 2, 2013 15:26:19 GMT -5
I'm interested for Arbor to return, because--as has been brought up a few times, kids who are 12-14 are developmentally at a state where they don't understand long term consequences. As in--their brain hasn't developed that yet. Thus it makes it very hard for me to get right with authorities finding 12-14 year old "sex workers" and having those sex workers say "Hey yah we choose this!' Good for them..they probably ARE choosing it--but that doesn't mean it's the best long term choice for them--just like choosing any other career at 12-14 may not be the best choice.
Additionally, because kids at that age don't see long term consequences--they are also easily manipulated. Maybe they are making a choice to do the work--hey we have kid actors! But they need a LOT of protection to make sure they aren't manipulated and ruined for the rest of their life. This is along the same lines...it would suck to get an STD, or pregnant at that age--who is watching over these kids--their finances--who chooses for them who they "work' with etc?
I think there is an imbalance between the idea that a 12-14 year old *chose this* (maybe they did)--and they are actually developmentally *ready* for this life. They are two very different things.
No one is advocating it's a legitimate occupation for children.
Wrong.
ETA: Actually, that's not right (what I said above). Perhaps not in favor of underage sex workers, but still of the belief they can be cognizant enough to decide that's what they really and honestly want to do to earn a wage. Which shows absolutely no concept of the maturity level and brain function of teens and pre-teens.
In response to your eta - I get what you're saying, but I guess I interpreted the posts differently. Not saying it's a good/wise choice by any stretch, but that it's still a choice. Kids often make terrible choices and most don't impact them in the manner that choosing to prostitute themselves would. Therefore we shouldn't allow/condone/legalize underage prostitution, in much the same manner that we have laws preventing children from doing other "adult" things (driving, military service, etc).
I'm interested for Arbor to return, because--as has been brought up a few times, kids who are 12-14 are developmentally at a state where they don't understand long term consequences. As in--their brain hasn't developed that yet. Thus it makes it very hard for me to get right with authorities finding 12-14 year old "sex workers" and having those sex workers say "Hey yah we choose this!' Good for them..they probably ARE choosing it--but that doesn't mean it's the best long term choice for them--just like choosing any other career at 12-14 may not be the best choice.
Additionally, because kids at that age don't see long term consequences--they are also easily manipulated. Maybe they are making a choice to do the work--hey we have kid actors! But they need a LOT of protection to make sure they aren't manipulated and ruined for the rest of their life. This is along the same lines...it would suck to get an STD, or pregnant at that age--who is watching over these kids--their finances--who chooses for them who they "work' with etc?
I think there is an imbalance between the idea that a 12-14 year old *chose this* (maybe they did)--and they are actually developmentally *ready* for this life. They are two very different things.
Agree. Again, I'm pretty sure everyone is on the same page in regards to this part of the issue. I could be wrong though, I certainly have been before (and will again no doubt).
I'm saying that if you want people to care even less about sex trafficking than they currently do, promoting the idea that sex work is a perfectly legitimate and uncontroversial occupation, even for children, is a great way to do it.
No one is advocating it's a legitimate occupation for children.
It sounds to me like this post is saying exactly that:
Because we've decided that kids aren't sexual beings? Even though rates of teen pregnancy are sky high? Twelve and 14 year old kids ARE having sex, some of them LOTS of it. And, yes, they are making a conscious choice. Whether or not we agree with that choice, or whether or not we think it's a good choice for them, or whether or not it's a legal choice doesn't change the fact that they've made the decision that they would like to engage it sex work to support themselves. I don't give a shit whether or not they can "legally" consent to sex enough to become an "illegal" prostitute. That doesn't change whether or not they WANT to do it.
ETA: FWIW, I'm uncomfortable with underage sex workers, because I believe being educated can help sex workers negotiate better working conditions for themselves, and will help them with other life skills - NOT because I believe that underage sex workers are incapable of consciously deciding that they like sex enough to want to earn a living from it.
This thread went off the deep end when it was suggested kids could consent and willingly be sex workers. If anyone doesn't like my responses they can ignore them as I do other ridiculous shit I see on here.
But that's not what she really said. She said not all are trafficked.
Is was said a vast majority in NY are doing it by choice. That is when shit got crazy because whatever research was done to determine that was obviously inadequate and shouldn't even been brought into a reasonable discussion. Yet since it was all bets are off.
This thread went off the deep end when it was suggested kids could consent and willingly be sex workers. If anyone doesn't like my responses they can ignore them as I do other ridiculous shit I see on here.
But that's not what she really said. She said not all are trafficked.
I'm saying that if you want people to care even less about sex trafficking than they currently do, promoting the idea that sex work is a perfectly legitimate and uncontroversial occupation, even for children, is a great way to do it.
No one is advocating it's a legitimate occupation for children.
I think what Druid is getting at is my original question about how we are defining choice and I was wondering if the average age really is as early as the DoJ stat, how does that work with what has been said about sex workers choosing that path in the past few weeks. And arbor's article talked about kids being able to choose that. So I guess I do wonder how sources that aren't lagging behind like the DoJ are treating choice. Am I making any sense?
December did address that partially with her info (thanks, btw!).
No one is advocating it's a legitimate occupation for children.
She came close enough. She specifically said her reason for disliking the idea of child sex workers was because they need more education in order to negotiate better benefits for themselves. NOT because they are incapable of deciding that since they like sex they should do it for a living. Take that one step further - someone negotiates on their behalf, or they receive education on how to negotiate benefits, and what's left? That we're forced to accept this as perfectly rational, safe and moral because anything other than that is slut shaming? No thanks.