User suggests that legalizing prostitution may not be the best thing ever. /r/news users vehemently disagree. 233 children (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
9 ups - 4 downs = 5 votes
39 comments submitted at 21:19:21 on Mar 21, 2014 by mypsychoticself
User suggests that legalizing prostitution may not be the best thing ever. /r/news users vehemently disagree. 233 children (np.reddit.com)
SubredditDrama
9 ups - 4 downs = 5 votes
39 comments submitted at 21:19:21 on Mar 21, 2014 by mypsychoticself
I would think that legalizing prostitution (at least in my country) would give sex workers more agency.
So far, everywhere that has legalized prostitution has also experienced a MASSIVE spike in human trafficking. There's a mountain of evidence to back this up. Google it if you don't believe me
New Zealand has one of the most radical legalization frameworks on the planet and there has been no massive spike in trafficking.
The difference is that NZ does not have corrupt and failed countries on their border, suggesting the problem has more to do with geography and economics than law.
I mean, the countries that the 'trafficked' prostitutes are from are totally prostitution free, right?
New Zealand is not exempt from the human trafficking boom
> The US State Department assigns New Zealand a Tier One assessment, being countries deemed by the State Department to have a trafficking problem but fully complying with the US Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act's minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking.
NZ is a source country, meaning that's where the trafficked people come from
> New Zealand is a destination country for women who are trafficked from Malaysia, Hong Kong, People's Republic of China, and other countries in Asia for commercial sexual exploitation.
And if we're talking about corrupted neighbors, NZ has one of the worst! Papua New Guinea is a haven for sex trafficking and tourism
Human trafficking in PNG exposed by new report, Australia news
EDIT: More sources, clarity, cleaned up walls of text
Why don't you include the next line in the paragraph, after your selective quote:
> The New Zealand government, as well as the Children's Commissioner, have been critical of the US State Department reports in past years.
Or the first line of that article:
> The New Zealand government considers that the country has no experience of human trafficking but efforts are made to deal with any potential issues.
The US State Department report is utter bullshit and is treating hearsay figures published by religious nutters in NZ with no basis in evidence, as fact.
> "In the past the Americans themselves have acknowledged it wasn't an accurate reflection, but once again the report seems to have been issued without any changes," the spokesman said.
> The issue would almost certainly be raised with the Americans again.
> The report has been widely criticised in previous years, including by the Children's Commissioner.
Can you find any credible reports of actual cases of human trafficking in the NZ sex industry? Or can you only find reports by the US state department looking to bully NZ into enacting prohibition on sex work, as is their policy?
> The US State Department report is utter bullshit
...
> Or can you only find reports by the US state department looking to bully NZ into enacting prohibition on sex work, as is their policy?
LOL OK, go away troll
Well, you I have posted an article of NZ politicians, the Child Commissioner and others calling the state department report factually incorrect. You also deliberately misrepresented the tone of the wikipedia entry that you posted.
And the Americans themselves have admitted that the report is not "an accurate reflection".
Where are your facts?