Child Trafficking in the Developing World and the West

[CarlManvers2019]

I never understood this until I met a real member of the modern American aristocracy. They have no respect, no patriotisim and no interest in the old meritocracy. They are every bit as evil and depraved as you can imagine. In fact most of them aren't even American.

The difference between being Asocial and Antisocial is that one prefers to mostly be alone or away even physically from other people, while the latter spends much time with people but is a total asshole that may even enjoy being an asshole

For the latter, there's no substitute for something that involves REAL people

I think lots of Far Left SJW types who turn out to have more shit behind their closets than the people they accuse and "cancel" and discriminate against and call all sorts of shit, secretly look down on guys like nerds for being in a way closer to the first than the latter. You know, the sort of Feminist turns out to be a sexual predator types, who may also go on persecuting and accusing people of similar and gets more pats on the back than those innocent and accused

 

[Fleiur]

They really don't play into one another. People who do abortions don't view the baby as alive, and generally view themselves as doctors. People who traffic in people aren't doing it because they think its good, but because of money or lust. There are totally different motivations.


As for children getting abortions, these would happen regardless of whether abortion was legal. In fact, it would be easier for them to get abortions if abortions were illegal, because the abortionist couldn't report them, as some would do otherwise. Remember, abortionists view themselves as pro-women, and are mandatory reporters, being doctors. Abortions also massively reduce child trafficking, as there are less children, especially unwanted/poor children.

None of this justifies abortion, as that's murder, but two things can be wrong without them being linked.

One of the biggest solution to sex trafficking (at least for the trafficking of adults and older teens, though it has knock on effects on child prostitution) is legalizing prostitution. This has a ton of positive benefits. First, it removes much of the financial incentive (much like legalizing drugs). The issue with banning prostitution and cracking down on it is that the end result increases the profitability for those who are left, and thus increases the attractiveness of dealing in people. Second, it empowers prostitutes so they don't need pimps to operate. Much of the 'work' a pimp does is ensure that the cops don't come down on prostitutes, and without this necessity, and with prostitutes able to report the pimp to the cops without fear of arrest, pimping will die out about as fast as illegal weed dealing in Colorado. Third, this has a knock on effect on child prostitution. The same pimps who traffic in adults are usually also trafficking in kids. If demand for illegal prostitution declines, so does the job market for traffickers in general. It won't eliminate it, but it will reduce it.

But abortionists cover it up with discreet abortions. That's my point. You can't dismiss how evil things enable each other.

And a pedophile will still go for kids even if prostitution was legal.

 

[Abhorsen]

But abortionists cover it up with discreet abortions. That's my point. You can't dismiss how evil things enable each other.

They don't enable each other though. 1) Abortion reduces unwanted children, and directly causes the lowering of unwanted or impoverished children, which means that it significantly lowers the number of kids that are vulnerable to abduction. 2) Abortionists usually do report kids if they think they are abused. You need to understand how an abortionist thinks. They believe they are a good guy standing up for women's rights. Of course the normal abortionist would try to report them. But nearly no illegal abortionist would because of fear of being arrested themselves.

And a pedophile will still go for kids even if prostitution was legal.

You completely missed my argument, again. Legal prostitution means trafficking people gets massively less profitable. Much of the infrastructure for trafficking kids is the same as trafficking young adults. This infrastructure won't be maintained if it isn't profitable to do so. By infrastructure, I mean things like pimps, the fear pimps put into their targets so they can't leave, methods of online sex buying, etc.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

They don't enable each other though. 1) Abortion reduces unwanted children, and directly causes the lowering of unwanted or impoverished children, which means that it significantly lowers the number of kids that are vulnerable to abduction. 2) Abortionists usually do report kids if they think they are abused. You need to understand how an abortionist thinks. They believe they are a good guy standing up for women's rights. Of course the normal abortionist would try to report them. But nearly no illegal abortionist would because of fear of being arrested themselves.

You completely missed my argument, again. Legal prostitution means trafficking people gets massively less profitable. Much of the infrastructure for trafficking kids is the same as trafficking young adults. This infrastructure won't be maintained if it isn't profitable to do so. By infrastructure, I mean things like pimps, the fear pimps put into their targets so they can't leave, methods of online sex buying, etc.

Ever watched Foundation For Economic Education? Because its pretty nice

And hell, same arguments could be made for Fireams, Drugs, Vale Juice Alcohol, Sexbots & wildlife

Won’t be funding Organized Crime syndicates who use that alcohol money to do worse shit

 

[Fleiur]

They don't enable each other though. 1) Abortion reduces unwanted children, and directly causes the lowering of unwanted or impoverished children, which means that it significantly lowers the number of kids that are vulnerable to abduction.


2) Abortionists usually do report kids if they think they are abused. You need to understand how an abortionist thinks. They believe they are a good guy standing up for women's rights. Of course the normal abortionist would try to report them. But nearly no illegal abortionist would because of fear of being arrested themselves.



You completely missed my argument, again. Legal prostitution means trafficking people gets massively less profitable. Much of the infrastructure for trafficking kids is the same as trafficking young adults. This infrastructure won't be maintained if it isn't profitable to do so. By infrastructure, I mean things like pimps, the fear pimps put into their targets so they can't leave, methods of online sex buying, etc.

No. They think about profit. Abortion has been around for decades, but it hasn't lessened trafficking. Rather, abortionists help cover up child trafficers' crimes and child abusers' crimes.

 

[Fleiur]

Ever watched Foundation For Economic Education? Because its pretty nice

And hell, same arguments could be made for Fireams, Drugs, Vale Juice Alcohol, Sexbots & wildlife

Won’t be funding Organized Crime syndicates who use that alcohol money to do worse shit

I can make the same argument for laws you support. Laws don't prevent stealing. In fact, it drives it underground. Therefore stealing should be legal.

 

[CarlManvers2019]

I can make the same argument for laws you support. Laws don't prevent stealing. In fact, it drives it underground. Therefore stealing should be legal.

Laws don’t prevent stealing, guns do

Laws doesn’t prevent murder, guns do

And it all depends on the level of moderation and willingness to do it or not pull the trigger but still put the threat/warning

Anyway, bye AuthRight

 

[Abhorsen]

No. They think about profit. Abortion has been around for decades, but it hasn't lessened trafficking. Rather, abortionists help cover up child trafficers' crimes and child abusers' crimes.

You are citing what looks like two example in an attempt to prove a larger point. First, the plural of anecdote is not data, until you have a couple hundred anecdotes. Second, and here's the big problem: almost everyone but the most vile people think of themselves as the good guys. Doctors especially think they are doing the right thing (and in fairness, most are saving countless lives). Abortion doctors think of themselves as doctors, providing an essential service and obeying the Hippocratic Oath. They aren't, but that's what they believe. Finally, your statement that it hasn't lessened trafficking is just wrong, and without any evidence. In a similar world without abortion, trafficking would be an even bigger problem, as would the need for a way to care for all the unwanted babies. Note that there are more abortions per year than there are foster kids in the entire US system, from 0 to 18. Many of those kids would get lost in the shuffle and exploited.

I can make the same argument for laws you support. Laws don't prevent stealing. In fact, it drives it underground. Therefore stealing should be legal.

Yet again, you ignore all nuance.

The issue is that even if one thinks prostitution is wrong causes a lot of a far greater crime: sex slavery. Also, laws do significantly lower the rate of stealing, just as they lower the rate of drug use and prostitution. The problem is that there are unintended consequences. Banning drugs, like banning alcohol, makes organized illegal activity wildly popular, leading to gangs and gang warfare. Drugs don't cause nearly as much problems as these do. Banning prostitution likewise incentivizes sex slavery, which then makes child sex slavery easier to hide alongside successful adult sex traffickers.

 

[Fleiur]

You are citing what looks like two example in an attempt to prove a larger point. First, the plural of anecdote is not data, until you have a couple hundred anecdotes. Second, and here's the big problem: almost everyone but the most vile people think of themselves as the good guys. Doctors especially think they are doing the right thing (and in fairness, most are saving countless lives). Abortion doctors think of themselves as doctors, providing an essential service and obeying the Hippocratic Oath. They aren't, but that's what they believe. Finally, your statement that it hasn't lessened trafficking is just wrong, and without any evidence. In a similar world without abortion, trafficking would be an even bigger problem, as would the need for a way to care for all the unwanted babies. Note that there are more abortions per year than there are foster kids in the entire US system, from 0 to 18. Many of those kids would get lost in the shuffle and exploited.


Yet again, you ignore all nuance.

The issue is that even if one thinks prostitution is wrong causes a lot of a far greater crime: sex slavery. Also, laws do significantly lower the rate of stealing, just as they lower the rate of drug use and prostitution. The problem is that there are unintended consequences. Banning drugs, like banning alcohol, makes organized illegal activity wildly popular, leading to gangs and gang warfare. Drugs don't cause nearly as much problems as these do. Banning prostitution likewise incentivizes sex slavery, which then makes child sex slavery easier to hide alongside successful adult sex traffickers.

You never provided any evidence and/or citations on all the things that you said here.
Can you give me citations and evidence to support them?

 

[Abhorsen]

You never provided any evidence and/or citations on all the things that you said here.
Can you give me citations and evidence to support them?

So some of it is basic thought and reasoned argument, which stands on its own merit, though others have argued it better. I'd look at the book Narconomics in particular for it's discussion about how to stop the horrors of the drug trade, and it's discussion about how to stop gang violence through legalization. But if you need a citation about why drug banning doesn't work, I'll cite Al Capone as an example of the end result of prohibition. Much of the same logic applies to the prostitution trade. But for the specific facts I cite:
Total Number of children in foster care. ~ 400k
Number of abortions per year. ~ 600k

 

[Abhishekm]

There is an argument against the legalization reduces crime argument. The crime finding another market argument. That in addition to the Legalization has other consequences argument.

Avocados are a target for Cartel control and extortion in Mexico, Avocados. Crime is a product of criminals as much if not more than it is opportunity. Prohibition is always cited as an example of the failure of illegalization but its not like gangs became less of a problem after it. The seedier elements just moved on to harder and harder markets. And less hard markets too in the form of more diverse smuggling and counterfeits.

Leaving all moral or value based arguments aside. There is nothing to say that prostitution legalization would not just increase the problem and a lot of anecdotal evidence to say it could make it worse. Primarily the problem of legal prostitution in the first place. Amsterdam is a horrifying case study in it when you get past the degenerate tourist trap reputation.

And honestly none of that actually implies any reason why legalization would deincentivize trafficking in the first place. Prostitution legal or not tends to have a more general level of access to it that the more darker crime of trafficking does. Nothing is to say legalization the one would not just make covering the other easier instead of less profitable.

As to the abortion portion Asia and India in particular has a different binary on it as anyone can understand. At some point or level it has to accepted that it is a form of murder either of a full human life or a potential one. The argument generally devolves to a argument on the time frame for when it 'counts' or if it is 'justified' as a 'violation' of 'autonomy' not to be able to.

But that to me came after the arguments of female infanticide protested in my younger years by my teachers and relatives and news of China's authoritarian one child policies and how exactly they enforce them.

I've never gotten the argument here. Its never seemed coherent on the Choice side atleast in their current version. Yes, I understand the argument of bodily autonomy and the level of authoritarian overreach it would take to illegalize it.

I honestly am not for illegalization purely due to what it would take and the implications. But its seems deeply dishonest to call it anything but what it is. The ending of a potential life.

I see why you would want to. A mix of political expediency to soften the actual nature of what you are advocating for to more palatable terms and maybe at times even as a attempted kindness. But it has and probably always seem deeply disingenuous to me. To mark a fetus as a life or not a life based on outside circumstances or the choices of another when or legal politics.

If you count it as a life when you do not wish to abort it, it remains a life when you you do. By all means the choice is still there but it feels wrong to try and convince someone that the choice is not about a life other than your own in the end.

Whatever the choice you would make for your life's best interest that is your choice and it is the law that decides whether you have that option. That whether someone finds it distasteful or not is still atleast similar to some other legalities when it comes to medical practices.

But what I find abhorrent is the double standard when it comes to defining a life. As if life can be declared to not be life at all for the sake of politeness. To call a child a fetus and a fetus a clump of cells or the inverse based on convenience or usefulness. That is very dehumanizing to me. And I use that word in relation to the law and not just to the person.

Again I am not for banning abortion whatever you may think of me for it. Atleast in earlier stages and in that jve resigned myself that in an imperfect world it will happen. I do not find banning it practical or justifiable in a real world context. But I do not and will never consider it as anything other than the ending of a life. Whatever form of hypocrit that may make me.

 

[Fleiur]

So some of it is basic thought and reasoned argument, which stands on its own merit, though others have argued it better. I'd look at the book Narconomics in particular for it's discussion about how to stop the horrors of the drug trade, and it's discussion about how to stop gang violence through legalization. But if you need a citation about why drug banning doesn't work, I'll cite Al Capone as an example of the end result of prohibition. Much of the same logic applies to the prostitution trade. But for the specific facts I cite:
Total Number of children in foster care. ~ 400k
Number of abortions per year. ~ 600k

Still, what evidence is there that there is a shortage of children in the sex trade? There are over 4 million enslaved today and they are 4 more times more likely to be used for labor rather than sex: Child Trafficking Statistics - World's Children.

This means there's a surplus. The harvest is plentiful. What enables them are corrupt institutions like Planned Parenthood aborting the babies of trafficked women and girls for money.

 

[Fleiur]

You completely missed my argument, again. Legal prostitution means trafficking people gets massively less profitable. Much of the infrastructure for trafficking kids is the same as trafficking young adults. This infrastructure won't be maintained if it isn't profitable to do so. By infrastructure, I mean things like pimps, the fear pimps put into their targets so they can't leave, methods of online sex buying, etc.

One of the biggest solution to sex trafficking (at least for the trafficking of adults and older teens, though it has knock on effects on child prostitution) is legalizing prostitution. This has a ton of positive benefits. First, it removes much of the financial incentive (much like legalizing drugs). The issue with banning prostitution and cracking down on it is that the end result increases the profitability for those who are left, and thus increases the attractiveness of dealing in people. Second, it empowers prostitutes so they don't need pimps to operate. Much of the 'work' a pimp does is ensure that the cops don't come down on prostitutes, and without this necessity, and with prostitutes able to report the pimp to the cops without fear of arrest, pimping will die out about as fast as illegal weed dealing in Colorado. Third, this has a knock on effect on child prostitution. The same pimps who traffic in adults are usually also trafficking in kids. If demand for illegal prostitution declines, so does the job market for traffickers in general. It won't eliminate it, but it will reduce it.

Why are underaged girls still being trafficked in the Netherlands then?: At least 1,300 Dutch girls per year trafficked, exploited

 

[Bear Ribs]

But if you need a citation about why drug banning doesn't work, I'll cite Al Capone as an example of the end result of prohibition. Much of the same logic applies to the prostitution trade.

Al Capone didn't give up crime and become a model citizen as soon as alcohol was legalized. He was put down by law enforcement. If anything Al Capone is a strong argument against your position.

One of the biggest solution to sex trafficking (at least for the trafficking of adults and older teens, though it has knock on effects on child prostitution) is legalizing prostitution. This has a ton of positive benefits. First, it removes much of the financial incentive (much like legalizing drugs). The issue with banning prostitution and cracking down on it is that the end result increases the profitability for those who are left, and thus increases the attractiveness of dealing in people. Second, it empowers prostitutes so they don't need pimps to operate. Much of the 'work' a pimp does is ensure that the cops don't come down on prostitutes, and without this necessity, and with prostitutes able to report the pimp to the cops without fear of arrest, pimping will die out about as fast as illegal weed dealing in Colorado. Third, this has a knock on effect on child prostitution. The same pimps who traffic in adults are usually also trafficking in kids. If demand for illegal prostitution declines, so does the job market for traffickers in general. It won't eliminate it, but it will reduce it.

Do you have anything to back the bolded part up? It flies in the face of what I've seen. Further your conclusions are contrary to the evidence we have.

A Comparison of Pimp and Non-PimpControlled Women

Download Citation | A Comparison of Pimp and Non-PimpControlled Women | A study of 50 incarcerated urban prostitutes finds that 40% have been under the control of a pimp. Pimp-controlled prostitutes are more likely to... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

www.researchgate.net

Based on actual research, what pimps do is force younger women into prostitution, engage in violence to control them, and force the women into accepting more violent and abusive clients in order to get more money.

Inside the National Push to Arrest Men Who Buy Sex

Why cops across the U.S. are targeting men who pay for prostitutes

time.com

Long article so here's the most salient point:

After Germany legalized prostitution in 2002, police reported it became much more difficult to target abusive pimps, even as social workers said that prostitutes were working in even worse conditions than before, according to a 2013 article in German magazine Der Speigel. And a 2012 report published in the journal World Development found that as a general trend, countries with legalized prostitution tend to have more human trafficking.

Legalized prostitution leads directly to increased human trafficking, worse conditions for prostitutes, and untouchable pimps behind it.

 

[Fleiur]

True, prostitution normalizes violence towards women.

Sexual violence and physical assault are the norm for women in legal prostitution. A Dutch study states that 60% of women in legal prostitution were physically assaulted, 70% were threatened with physical assault, and 40% had been coerced into legal prostitution. Legal or illegal, the longer someone is in prostitution, the more he or she is physically endangered and psychologically harmed. If the prostitute says no to sex, violence is often used to receive “consent” for something. This creates and reinforces the mindset that violence is the answer. The National Sexual Violence Resource Center gives plenty of statistics about how this violence transfers to society.

Clackamas County Defense Attorney | DUI Lawyer | Local Attorney

Jared Justice is a Criminal Defense & DUI lawyer with extensive experience with many case types in courts throughout Oregon. Contact us today to learn more.

www.jaredjustice.com

Legalization doesn't make the "customers" saints, and the pimps don't go away.

 

[Terthna]

Al Capone didn't give up crime and become a model citizen as soon as alcohol was legalized. He was put down by law enforcement. If anything Al Capone is a strong argument against your position.

In what way? Al Capone's entire criminal career was built off of prohibition; this is not in dispute. The fact that he didn't magically disappear when prohibition ended just shows that putting the genie back in the bottle is not a simple endeavor.

 

[LordsFire]

In what way? Al Capone's entire criminal career was built off of prohibition; this is not in dispute. The fact that he didn't magically disappear when prohibition ended just shows that putting the genie back in the bottle is not a simple endeavor.

There's a fundamental difference between drinking alcohol and prostitution.

Drinking alcohol isn't inherently immoral. Prostitution is.

 

[Abhorsen]

Still, what evidence is there that there is a shortage of children in the sex trade? There are over 4 million enslaved today and they are 4 more times more likely to be used for labor rather than sex: Child Trafficking Statistics - World's Children.

This means there's a surplus. The harvest is plentiful. What enables them are corrupt institutions like Planned Parenthood aborting the babies of trafficked women and girls for money.

This is not how economics works, again. The people trying to kidnap kids to preform labor are probably very different than the ones who kidnap kids to preform sex acts. You haven't proven your point again.

... Planned Parenthood doesn't enable child prostitution. You need a ton more evidence for this baseless claim. I mean, I don't like them, but they aren't pro-child prostitution. If they were, they would have been caught and exposed by abortion activists and defunded ages ago. And I mean more than just one or two examples of a single person, but actual evidence of Planned Parenthood as an organization engaging in this. Again, two things can be evil and not have something to do with one another.

Also, just because planned parenthood engages in giving abortions doesn't make them any more responsible for unknowningly letting a child trafficker use it, any more than Master is for selling its locks to a child trafficker. The problem with abortion has nothing to do with child trafficking, except in lowering the number of kids.

Al Capone didn't give up crime and become a model citizen as soon as alcohol was legalized. He was put down by law enforcement. If anything Al Capone is a strong argument against your position.

He got his power from prohibition. That's what I'm arguing. The way to get rid of the crime is that one first has to legalize what the crime is doing. Only then will destroying the criminals have real progress. If we waved a wand, and removed all sex slavers from existence today, in a decade or so they'd be back and about as strong. The same goes for drug dealing. You have to patch the hole before you will see progress from bailing out the ship.

Do you have anything to back the bolded part up? It flies in the face of what I've seen. Further your conclusions are contrary to the evidence we have.

Your posts don't actually contradict what I'm saying. I'm in no way denying that pimps also have to work to keep sex slaves from leaving, just that they also play a role avoiding the cops (if they didn't avoid the cops, then they'd all be arrested). Without prostitution being illegal, they become economically less viable and easier to escape from.

There's a fundamental difference between drinking alcohol and prostitution.

Drinking alcohol isn't inherently immoral. Prostitution is.

I disagree. Prostitution can be done consensually, at which point it isn't inherently immoral, anymore than porn is.

 

[LordsFire]

I disagree. Prostitution can be done consensually, at which point it isn't inherently immoral, anymore than porn is.

Pornography is also inherently immoral, with the possible fringe case of keeping private porn of your own spouse.

Of course, we're building morality off of fundamentally different bases.

 

[Morphic Tide]

Of course, we're building morality off of fundamentally different bases.

In which case you cede all claims of anything about morality being "inherent", if you recognize the existence of different bases for it that can disagree on such things as prostitution.