Länderberichte GROSSBRITANNIEN:

[Marc of Frankfurt]

Hab unsere Unterschriften an die Organisatorinnen Cari, Catherine und Camille rausgeschickt. Also Daumen drücken - cross fingers.

[Marc of Frankfurt]

Newsnight debate between Mr MacShane and Niki
Adams(ECP)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtaEdI3aiwg[/youtube]



Emails of the Peers at:
http://www.prostitutescollective.net/Po ... Oppose.htm

Let Peers know the strength of your conviction and the breadth of opposition to the Bill. You can use the model letter but they would take note of your letter much more if you write about your our personal experience and views:
http://www.prostitutescollective.net/Po ... Letter.htm

Over 40 organisations have signed a statement against the Bill.
If you are part of an organisation or can sign in a professional capacity and haven’t added your signature yet, please do so right away at:
http://www.prostitutescollective.net/Or ... vs_PCB.htm





More:

1. Lobby and Briefing for Peers, 6-7pm this evening in Committee Room 3A
in the Lords:
http://www.prostitutescollective.net/PC ... idence.htm.

2. Demonstration against the Bill on Tuesday afternoon 12-2 in
Parliament Square:
http://www.prostitutescollective.net/Demo_Vs_PCB.htm

3. Nick Davies’s excellent Guardian investigation, our response to it
and other good comments and letters. Davies exposed how figures on
trafficking, which have been used to justify the Policing and Crime Bill and
the raids and deportations against sex workers, were fabricated. Our
letters have not been published:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/oct/2 ... xaggerated
viewtopic.php?p=67599#67599

4. Our response to Denis MacShane MP who is telling lies:
http://www.prostitutescollective.net/Re ... cShane.htm


[Safety First / ECP]





.

[Marc of Frankfurt]

Das Gesetz wurde beschlossen

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... ies-police

http://www.egovmonitor.com/node/30797

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... ex-slavery

[Snickerman]

Bye-Bye English Rights and Liberties!

Heute ist GB wie China, nur mit mehr Kameras.
Wann wird "Belle de Jour" wegen "Verharmlosung der Prostitution" angeklagt?
Wie lange noch bis zur Einführung des "Schwedischen Modells"?

[Arum]

Hat wohl auch alles zu tun mit der stätig wachsenden Fremdenfeindlichkeit im VK, so wie sie auch bei den Europawahlen zum Ausdruck kam, mit dem Erfolg für die British National Party.

Habe davon in London letztes Jahr ein trauriges Beispiel observieren dürfen. Ein sehr gut angezogener Srilankese fragte mich spätabends nach dem Weg, als ich auf meinen Bus wartete. Ich konnte ihm leider helfen. Da wo ich sass, reichte die Beleuchtung nicht um mich ausreichend auf der Karte orientieren zu können. Daraufhin hat der Herr die vielen Passanten nach dem Weg gefragt. Das heisst, er hat's versucht, aber in mindestens einer Viertelstunde hat nicht einer aus dutzenden Passanten ihm auch nur zuhören wollen. Erst als dann zufälligerweise ein anderer Srilankese vorbei kam, wurde er geholfen.

Mittlerweile hielt sich übrigens auch eine sehr gewagt angezogene junge Frau in der Nähe auf, die während ihrem Telefongespräch voller Lust mit ihren schönen langen Beinen in ihren Strumpfhosen auf dem Pflaster herumbewogen hat. Das wirkte schon sehr erotisch, muss ich sagen ;), vielleicht gerade auch weil sie gleichzeitig so unglaublich unschuldig wirkte.

Dieselbe Passanten die dem Srilankeser die Auskunft verweigerten, schauten auf ihr mit einer Mischung aus gehetzter Neugierde, Begierde, Ekel und Entsetzen.
Irgendein Kerl hat dan sogar speziell wegen ihr das Auto dort geparkt, hat sie angebaggert, aber sie liess sich nicht drangsalieren. Was sie sagte, konnte ich nicht mitbekommen, aber der Kerl hat sich dann voll erschüttert im Auto wieder aus dem Staub gemacht.

Die ganze Szene machte meiner Meinung nach schon sehr bildhaft, wie Fremdenfeindlichkeit und Unbequemkeit erotisch wirkenden Frauen gegenüber Hand in Hand gehen können.

[Marc of Frankfurt]

Danke für deinen Bericht
__



SPECIAL INVESTIGATION: The myth of Britain's foreign sex slaves


For years ministers have insisted that thousands of women are being smuggled into Britain and forced into prostitution. But when police staged a multi-million pound operation to smash the gangs, how many traffickers did they find? Not one

By Tom Rawstorne
Last updated at 9:32 AM on 13th November 2009


The overblown language was more red-top tabloid than heavyweight Government announcement. Issued by the Home Office, the press release bragged about the success of the largest-ever police crackdown on human trafficking - 'one of the worst crimes threatening our society'.

Breathlessly it went on to detail how women were being brought to this country and then 'sold as commodities for the purposes of sexual exploitation'.

But now, it continued, thanks to nationwide police operation Pentameter 2, a staggering 528 criminals involved in this 'abhorrent crime' had been arrested.

Bild
Myth or reatlity: Claims that large numbers of foreign women are being forced into prostitution are not accurate, experts say.

'At its core, this operation was about striking a blow against one of the most distressing aspects of serious and organised crime in this country - that of people-trafficking for sexual exploitation,' said Dr Tim Brain, Chief Constable of Gloucestershire and the man who headed the operation, announcing the figures in July 2008.

Also keen to weigh in with her observations was the then Home Secretary Jacqui Smith. 'Pentameter 2 has been a great success,' she said.

'I would commend all those involved who have made a real impact in rescuing victims and bringing to justice those who exploit them.'

As intended, the media lapped it up, encouraged by Dr Brain's claim that the number of trafficked sex workers in Britain was actually 18,000 - five times more than previous highest estimates.

No doubt the Home Office was delighted with the coverage its press release achieved. But not any more. Fifteen months on and those words have come back to haunt them with a vengeance [Rache, Vergeltung].

Last month, an investigation by the Guardian newspaper disclosed what Pentameter 2 had really achieved - the conviction of not one genuine sex trafficker.

• An official review of the operation found that of the 528 arrests, almost one quarter were wrongly recorded.
• Of the remainder, the vast majority of suspects were released without charge or charged with non-trafficking offences. That left just a handful of individuals appearing in court on sex trafficking charges.
• But of the 15 actually convicted, it was accepted in ten of the cases that the individuals involved had never coerced the prostitutes they worked with.
• The remaining five were convicted of importing women and forcing them to work as prostitutes - but those convictions stemmed from operations that pre- dated Pentameter 2.
  'This failure is just the tip of the iceberg'

With hindsight, the 'great success' announced by Miss Smith now looks like nothing of the sort. But, worse still, is that the failure of this operation is merely the tip of the iceberg.

Academics and experts say that for years they have been warning the Government that the number of trafficked women working in the sex industry is far fewer than was being claimed.

But despite these warnings, they say that Labour ministers and other feminist- dominated organisations have repeatedly relied upon these distorted figures to further their own vested interests and political agendas.

As a result, it seems likely that millions of pounds of public funding has been spent trying to fix a problem that is far less widespread than portrayed.

Of course, many women experience unimaginable horrors when working in the sex industry - and it is despicable that in this day and age they are reduced to selling themselves.

But this makes it even more vitally important that the Government has accurate statistics and facts to hand so they can tackle the many problems presented by the murky world of the sex worker.

Foto
Then Home Secretary Jacqui Smith heralded trafficking crackdown 'Parameter 2' a success

What is also causing concern is the way that the fears about sex trafficking have been used as leverage to launch a moral crusade designed to ban prostitution outright.

Legislation which will make it a crime for someone to pay for sex where the person providing the sex was 'coerced' in some way is currently going through its final Parliamentary phase.

While many would no doubt support steps aimed at clamping down on the sex trade, experts in the field warn that this law will not only be unworkable, but will put prostitutes at greater risk.

They say that the increased threat of prosecution will force them to work in a more clandestine way, increasing the risk of rape, assault and murder.

'The new legislation has been framed on a false premise,' is the way one puts it. 'That is bad enough in itself. But what is even worse is that there is a very real risk of women's lives being put at danger as a result.'

How many women working in the sex industry in Britain have been trafficked? That is the question that goes to the heart of this current controversy. And it is one that there is no clear answer to.

For starters, the definition of trafficking varies. Under the United Nations 2000 Palermo protocol, trafficking is enshrined in international law as involving the three 'Fs' - fear, force, or fraud - to transport an unwilling victim into sexual exploitation.

In British law, the bar is set far lower. Under the 2003 Sexual Offences Act, the word is used to cover the organised transportation of a man or woman into prostitution even if that individual does it willingly.

For example, an individual who travels to an airport to collect an immigrant who has willingly travelled to this country to work in the sex industry could be convicted of the offence of trafficking.

The situation is further confused by the large numbers of immigrants who have travelled to Britain illegally in the past decade. By definition, many will have been 'smuggled' here by a third party. But what if they subsequently end up working in the sex industry?


'The Government needs to be seen to be acting tough'

An added complication is that no one knows how many prostitutes there are in Britain anyway. The figure is put at 80,000 - but, because of the secretive nature of the industry, no one knows if that is the case.

It is to that background that the current estimates of trafficked women in Britain should be seen.

The most commonly quoted of these is a figure of 4,000. It was arrived at following highly speculative research commissioned by the Home Office in 2003.

At the time, even its authors admitted it was 'very approximate', 'subject to a very large margin of error', and 'should be treated with great caution'.

In making their calculations, researchers had assumed that every single foreign woman working in Soho's notorious 'walk-up' flats had been smuggled into the country and forced to work as a prostitute. The figures were then extrapolated across the country.

Despite the authors' words of caution, the Home Office took the figure as gospel and ran with it. Others, such as the Salvation Army, did the same.

Not content with that, Government ministers started to make even more outlandish claims about the extent of the problem.

In 2007, former Foreign Office minister Denis MacShane told the Commons in a debate that 'according to Home Office estimates, 25,000 sex-slaves work in the massage parlours and brothels of Britain'.

Subsequently challenged over the figure, he attributed it to a report he had read in a tabloid newspaper. 'I used to work for the Daily Mirror, so I trust the report,' he said.

Equally happy to play free and easy with the figures was Fiona Mactaggart, a former Home Office minister. In 2008, she told the Commons that she regarded all women prostitutes as victims of trafficking.

This, she said, was because their route into the industry 'almost always involves coercion, enforced addiction to drugs and violence from their pimps or traffickers'.

Similarly eye-catching claims were being made by other organisations.

Foto
Critics of new prostitution laws warn they could put sex workers at greater risk

The Poppy Project, a charity which has received £5.8 million Government funding and which wants to end all prostitution on the grounds that it 'helps to construct and maintain gender inequality', carried out research that found that 80 per cent of London prostitutes working in flats were foreign.

It then concluded that 'a large proportion of them are likely to have been trafficked into the country'.The trouble is there is no statistical evidence to support that claim - let alone the 25,000 figure or, indeed, even the 4,000 figure.

Dr Belinda Brooks-Gordon lectures in psychology and social policy at Birkbeck University and has been researching the sex industry in Britain for the past 15 years.

She says: 'The research lacks the methodological rigour of a GCSE project, it is that bad - it is Carry On Criminology. I would go so far as to say the way in which the 4,000 figure was reached is so bad that if it was handed in to me by a student, I would think it was a spoof.'

It is a point taken up by other experts in the field. They point out that research interviews conducted with migrant prostitutes show that the majority say they choose to work in the sex industry because of the improved living conditions and opportunities it offers to them and, via the money they send abroad, to their families.

Niki Adams, a campaigner for prostitutes' rights, says this is far nearer the truth. 'We get daily calls from women working in the sex industry,' she says.

'In all the years, we have come across only two women who fit that classic description of someone who has been trafficked. One was an African woman and the other came from Moldova. They were being held against their will, they were being forced to have sex with men, and they were not getting the money.'

She adds: 'We know the situation in Soho very, very well and are in touch with just about all the women working in the 53 flats that there are there. I feel absolutely confident those women are not trafficked.'

If that is the indeed the case then it begs the question as to who benefits, and how, from this gross exaggeration of the trafficking figures.

• In terms of the police, Miss Adams says that under the guise of responding to public concerns about trafficking, they have been able to carry out more extensive raids against prostitutes and other sex workers.
  
  She points out that under the Proceeds of Crime Act, police forces can now keep 25 per cent of any assets seized.
• For the Government, meanwhile, the tough talking about trafficking has coincided with the need to be seen to be acting tough against immigration per se.
• As for what motivated individual ministers to accept the figures unquestioningly, it is perhaps harder to understand.
  
  These inaccurate figures clearly chimed with their pre-conceptions of the sex industry. At the same time, they could be used to support the introduction of new legislation designed to challenge the perceived exploitation of women in the sex industry generally, a popular cause among the Left of the Labour Party.
  
  One argument is that the act of paying for sex fuels demand and that more demand means that more women will be trafficked to fill that demand. Stop one and you stop the other.
• Ready support for the politicians was provided by the charities and other organisations that have received Government funding to deal with the victims of trafficking.
  
  These same organisations have also been involved in conducting research into the levels of trafficking, the results of which have bolstered the view that it is a major problem.

The concern, of course, is that resources that might be better spent elsewhere have been devoted to this problem. Jacqui Smith's much-lauded Operation Pentameter 2 lasted six months, involved every police force in the country and raids on 822 premises. The convictions achieved hardly reflected the level of effort.

Although Dr Brain insists that the operation created a 'hostile' and discouraging environment for those involved in trafficking others, the police service admit that 'the facts speak for themselves'.

It is a point taken up by Dr Brooks-Gordon: 'The result of such hyperinflation is policy that spreads resources too thinly - sometimes missing the really needy. When looking for a needle in a haystack, it doesn't make sense to keep making the haystack bigger.'

Equally pressing, however, are concerns about the policing and crime bill currently going through Parliament. It contains a proposal to clamp down on trafficking by penalising any man who has sex with a woman who is 'controlled for gain' - even if the man is genuinely ignorant of the control.

Unsurprisingly, supporters of the bill have been quick to dismiss the attacks on it and on the trafficking figures that have been used to support its introduction.

They insist that it is inherently difficult to assess the numbers of trafficked women and that if even one person is trafficked it is one too many.

No one would argue with that. But, at the same time, there is a danger that the over-eagerness to state their case, which now appears to have been exposed, could damage their cause in the long-term.



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... laves.html





.

[Marc of Frankfurt]

Engagierter Kommentar einer Arbeiterin
gegen die übliche prostitutionsfeindliche Medienschlacht:


Enough hand-wringing on prostitution

Belle de Jour's unmasking and new laws have both
prompted the usual supercilious cant
from an out-of-touch commentariat

Deutsch lesen via Google


o Belinda Webb
o guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 18 November 2009 14.02 GMT


It didn't surprise me that Belle de Jour has turned out to be the typical middle-class professional. Canny and sustained marketing from blog to book requires a certain level of educated co-operation, as well as a media-savvy articulacy that most sex workers, whether on £30 or £300 an hour, wouldn't know how to exploit. The other clue takes the form of that most Blyton-esque of actors in the TV version – Billie Piper. But now that Dr Brooke Magnanti has unmasked herself, she will no doubt be coerced into the murkier world of celebrity in which she will find herself as rent-a-quote for the entire sex industry.

Witness also the need for Magnanti's fellow middle-class professionals join in the age-old discourse on the rights and wrongs of prostitution that does little to illuminate real experiences. They resort only to the usual Kant [Cant = Frömmelei] (the populist version of categorical objective) – you shouldn't do what you wouldn't want others to do, ie your mother/sister/daughter.





I don't include myself in this middle-class comment-fest. I consider myself working class, a political stance also based on the fact that I grew up on estates where many were on the game.

• There was "Limerick Mary", whose kitchen was full of cats. She would leave the tap dripping on self-service for them while she was upstairs earning a few quid. It saved her from having to get up at dawn to clean offices for much less.
• There was also Analise, who crept out in the middle of the night to "do it". Although for her it was more of a dip in, dip out option (pardon the pun) that fitted around childcare. Analise was actually of middle-class Cheshire stock, but had escaped the sex-slavery and beatings of her first marriage years before, which hadn't gone down well with her husband, or her mother. She made the split with them permanent when she took up with a black Welshman. But he died, leaving her the penniless single mother of three toddlers.
• Then there was Marcia, who actually owned a brothel in Salford. She did well out of it. Not for one working the till at Woolworths was Marcia. And why should she be, one may ask, when capitalism tells us that the canny [der Kluge] work smart, not hard.

But what a lot of this current hand-wringing reveals is the age-old middle-class moral panic and condescension that sees them feeling they have to "take charge" and control the "deviancy" without addressing root causes.

What would be better is if prostitution were made legal – then many women would feel safer about taking part in the discourse. Extending the type of voices heard in the media would go some way to prove "the courage and pragmatism of an enlightened society" referred to by Tanya Gold in her column.

[Diese Propagande und Tatsachenverdrehung kann man vielfach sogar deutsch übersetzt nachgedruckt gelesen z.B. hier. Anm.]

Moreover, the introduction of legislation aimed at all prostitution, placing responsibility with the punter, congratulated by Beatrix Campbell and Denis MacShane is inconsistent with the way other two-way illegal transactions are treated. In the drug dealer/addict set-up it is the dealer vilified, and the user is the pitiful addict.

Where's the help for men in all this? Many are, no doubt, addicted to anonymous sex. Shouldn't this be part of the picture when it comes to reducing "demand"? In its current form, the legislation actually reinforces old messages: men are powerful instigators; women are infantilised feebles. They are if Gold's column is anything to go by. She cites a report claiming prostitutes are "riddled with physical and mental illness and the longer one works as a prostitute, the more one's health deteriorates" and that 89% of prostitutes want to get out. But the same is true of any number of jobs that fail to pay a living wage that lead many women into prostitution in the first place! Ask how many chambermaids want to "get out" – 99%?

I don't buy the "let's protect the immigrant sex-slaves" emphasis either. This isn't just about those who are trafficked from other countries – but those who have been brought up and formed within this country's structures. Too often, this approach is really just a tactic of "look over there, not here" that ignores far more that is wrong than what it acknowledges.

It's where the power is. Class structures. Boring, I know, but there you have it. Cleaning five-star hotel rooms for minimum wage or sleeping with men for money – be it £30 or £300 quid? I know which I'd choose.

Original mit vielen Links:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... le-de-jour





.

[Marc of Frankfurt]

Callboy Thierry schreibt gegen Feministin Julie Bindel
und das Sexworker Werbeverbot


http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... sement-ban




________________





High court spricht Freier frei
Schein-Sexworker-Polizistin hatte ihn in die Falle gelockt

Court rejects undercover sex case in Nottingham


A man should not have been prosecuted for asking a woman for sex in a Nottingham red light district, a High Court judge has ruled.

The man was arrested for a public nuisance offence by an undercover police officer, in Mapperley Road.

The case, from July 2008, had been thrown out by magistrates previously, but prosecutors tried to reopen it.

At the High Court earlier, Lord Justice Elias criticised prosecutors for trying to criminalise lawful conduct.


'Quite hopeless'

The police sting operation took place after complaints from Mapperley residents about the impact of prostitution in the area.

A police officer posed as "Sarah", a prostitute, and agreed a price for sex with the man after he approached her.

Magistrates cleared him of any offence, ruling he had done nothing wrong.

But the Director of Public Prosecutions tried to re-open the case in the High Court.

However, Lord Justice Elias said the attempt was "quite hopeless" and upheld the ruling a single incident of asking a woman for sex in a known red light district could not amount to a nuisance.

He added "a single, otherwise lawful, act" does not become a criminal offence just because other people are carrying out "similar, otherwise lawful, activity" in the same area.

Observing prosecuting authorities were using "wholly artificial" concepts to criminalise lawful conduct which they considered to be "reprehensible [verwerflich]", Lord Justice Elias urged all courts to have "no truck with it".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/engl ... 508931.stm



Eine legale Handlung oder Ordnungswidrigkeit wird nicht deshalb eine kriminelle Handlung, weil möglicherweise im Sexbiz, Pay6 und Rotlicht auch andere schwere kriminelle Handlungen stattfinden.

Der Richter Lord Justice Elias vom Berufungsgericht High Court in Nottingham attestiert den Polizeiorganen und Behörden völlig künstlich aufgebaute Konzepte um legales Handeln zu kriminalisieren.





.

[Lycisca]

Das Urteil ist auch für SW nützlich, die Opfer verdeckter Ermittlungen (Escort-Tätigkeit im Sperrbezirk, Auslotung von Wohnungsprostitution) wurden.

[Marc of Frankfurt]

Historisches Fundstück

Sexworker Werbung / Sexworker-Verzeichnis anno 1757




Harris's List of Covent Garden Ladies, London

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harris%27s ... den_Ladies




Urteil 1961
The right to protection from retroactive criminal law
Shaw v. Director of Public Prosecutions:

http://cs.anu.edu.au/~James.Popple/publ ... ive/6.html


3. März 2010
PLANS by the Labour Party to criminalise adverts for sex services have been found to duplicate existing common law:

http://stephenpaterson.wordpress.com/20 ... esent-law/





.

[Marc of Frankfurt]

Pro-Contra Sexwork Diskussion im Studenten-Debattierclub "Oxford Union"




www.oxford-union.org


Bericht von der Sexwork-Debatte:
http://townhall.com/columnists/JaniceSh ... on_debates



Zur Sexwork Debatte die mit 127-90 für die Sexworker entschieden wurde kenne ich leider keine Fotos, wohl aber zur Debatte ob Berühmtheit Verantwortung bedeutet:





(passt irgendwie auch zum Sexwork Thema ;-)

quelle



.

[Marc of Frankfurt]

Radio-Talk zwischen junger und alter Sexarbeiterin:


Helen worked as a bar hostess and prostitute in the 1970s. She talks to Maria, who is currently funding her way through university by being a sex worker. How do their experiences differ?


15 min:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00qzrjg

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b00qzrjg

[Ariane]

Das neue Prostitutionsgesetz tritt zum 1. April nun in Kraft. Die verschiedenen ansässigen SW-Organisationen konnten die Crime & Policy Bill und einige damit verknüpfte Gesetze bzw. Änderungen ein wenig aufweichen; die Total-Kriminalisierung von Kunden ist raus, allerdings macht mann sich strafbar, ob bewußt oder unwissend, wenn es zum Kontakt mit einer Zwangsprostituierten kommt. Auch werden alle dritten Parteien, wenn ich es richtig verstanden habe, die am Geschäft zwischen Anbieterin und Kunde mitwirken, kriminalisiert. Dies müßte alle Betreiber von Vermieter von Arbeitswohnungen, Bordellen, Agenturen, Werbepartner betreffen (?!), da dies alles Vermittlungsleistungen sind. Bitte korrigieren, wenn ich es falsch verstanden habe.

Alles weitere in englischer Sprache:

The law on prostitution changes for England, Wales and Northern Ireland on April 1st

This is no April Fools Joke. As from April 1st all clients must be sure they are purchasing sexual services from a sex worker who is no coerced. I hope you were doing this already. There is no excuse of I did not know. Buying and selling of sex is still legal. The client though will be a criminal where all of the following apply.
The client makes or promises payment for the sexual services of a prostitute
a third part uses force, threats (whether or not relating to violence) or any other form of coercion, or practises any form of deception, to induce the prostitute to provide sexual services to the client.
The third party engaged in that conduct does so for the expectation of gain for themselves or another person.

Additionally the law covers the whole world, and it makes not difference if the client is aware of the exploitative conduct of the third part.

I must also add, brothels are now in greater danger of being closed down. The police require less evidence to close them. Kerb crawlers are also at greater risk, so don't even think about driving slowly through a red light district. The police could now stop you and arrest you for kerb crawling. Check the following Home Offices sites for more information, though I am sure it will be in the papers soon.


The Law http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2009/uk ... -pb1-l1g14

Home Office Campaign Site http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/crime-vict ... stitution/


Derweil plant Labour - wir befinden uns auch im Vorwahlkampf - ein generelles Werbe-Verbot, was schon seit einem Jahr herumgeistert. Dieses Werbeverbot soll nicht nur Anzeigen Local Papers beeinhalten, auch einschlägige Portale. In Schottland wurde dies bereits umgesetzt.


Stop Labour plans to make advertising illegal, and Scottish proposals

For those in Wales, England and Northern Ireland can I ask you to write to the International Union of Sex Workers. They are trying to stop Labour from banning advertising.

If your work in Scotland, there has been a short extension for you to provide evidence to parliament in the hope you can stop the outrageous proposed legislation
which will outlaw the purchase of sex, advertising and indoor sale of sexual services. You have now until

Stop Labour plans to make advertising illegal
=============================================

Are you someone who advertises or used to advertise in a local paper? This has been
stopped in many areas due to the Labour Party talking to local newspaper owners,
saying that letting us advertise helps traffickers. Now, they?re thinking of making
it illegal to advertise (possibly online as well as in newspapers).

The IUSW, through our contacts with GMB union, will pressure the Labour Party to
drop policies that harm our safety and our livelihood. GMB staff are meeting with
the ministers who are writing the manifesto.

We want to hear from people who?ve been affected by the policy so far.

Let us know if you want to be able to advertise in print. Let us know if you used to
advertise in print and how you advertise or find clients now, especially if you now
use someone else to find clients for you rather than being able to advertise for
yourself.

Write to
iuswcollectiveemail@googlemail.com


Scottish Law banning the purchase of sexual services.
=====================================================

Laws have been proposed which will bane the purchase of sexual services, all advertising and all brothels and agencies. This is proposed as an amendment to existing legislation going through the Scottish parliament. Evidence can be
submitted, and the time has been extended now until the 16th March.

The committee has decided to take further written and oral evidence on the prostitution amendments (also on other amendments, and it may be that Stage 2 will have to be given a formal extension). There was no opposition to this in the
committee or from Trish Godman who was present. A couple of MSPs said very strongly
that what is needed is research evidence, not opinion!
The date given for the amendments to be considered in the committee is 2 weeks hence
i.e. 16th March. I do not know yet what the deadline will be for receipt of written
evidence but I will ask the clerk later this morning as soon as the meeting is over.

Scotpep can take written evidence for you, and that means they will report the
evidence as you give it without your name been associated with it. Giving evidence
always requires you to give your name.

So the proposal at the moment is to get as many sex workers as possible to attend
invited meetings at Parliament to meet MSPs to give their view on what this
legislation will do.

1.) Immediate action write to

justice.committee@scottish.parliament.uk

2.) Make yourself know to ScotPep and volunteer what you feel able to do. Call just
to discuss. Ther may be something you feel comfotable with. Remember Ruth was an
escort and knows the scene.

http://www.scot-pep.org.uk/
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3/co ... ssions.htm


3.) Spread this information around to every escort who works in Scotland. Try and
persuade those you know who work in Saunas and escort Agencies that this is a
serious threat to their earning powers and safety.

4.) Always worth while mentioning your views to your elected representative. Though
the downside is you generally have to write with your own name and address.

This is the proposed amendment to the Scottish Police Bill. It has been tabled late
as a minor amendment, and therefore does not require proper scrutiny. It could
almost go through with just a few minutes mention. This criminalises all selling
of sexual services, (prostitution, could apply to strip clubs, peep shows, lap
dancing. Would a dinner date (traditional) fall under this if I expected sex at the
end.). All Saunas and Agencies would be illegal. No advertisements in any paper,
or Internet. (Sport would be illegal, only foreign websites would work, adult-work
maybe, but punter link would stop). Escort sites would have to be hosted offshore.
Landlords would have to be ignorant of what you were using the flat for



Engaging in, advertising and facilitating paid-for sexual activities

11A Engaging in a paid-for sexual activity

(1) A person (A) commits an offence, to be known as the offence of engaging in a
paid-for sexual activity, if A knowingly engages in a paid-for sexual activity with
another person (B).

(2) A sexual activity is paid for where B engages in that activity in exchange for
payment.

(3) For the purposes of subsection (2), it is immaterial whether the payment is made?

(a) by A or by another person, or
(b) to B or to another person on B's behalf.

11B Advertising paid-for sexual activities

A person commits an offence, to be known as the offence of advertising paid for
sexual activities, if that person knowingly advertises, by any means, the
availability of sexual activities that can be engaged in for payment.

11C Facilitating engagement in a paid-for sexual activity

(1) A person (A) commits an offence, to be known as the offence of facilitating
engagement in a paid-for sexual activity, if A knowingly facilitates the engagement
of another person (B) in a paid-for sexual activity with another person (C).

(2) A sexual activity is paid for where C engages in that activity in exchange for
payment.

(3) For the purposes of subsection (2), it is immaterial whether the payment is made?

(a) by A, by B or by another person, or
(b) to C or to another person on C's behalf.

(4) For the purposes of subsection (1), facilitating the engagement by B in a paid
for sexual activity includes (but is not limited to)?

(a) arranging B's engagement in the activity,
(b) making payment to C or to another person on C's behalf,
(c) making available premises in which the activity takes place, or
(d) transporting B, or arranging transport for B, to where the activity takes place


Quelle: Rundmail von selectanescort.com

[Marc of Frankfurt]

Policing and Crime Act 2009


Section 17 of the Policing and Crime Act 2009, which come into force on 1st April, will allow the courts to impose a rehabilitative order on people convicted of loitering and soliciting for the purpose of prostitution.

An Engagement and Support Order will be an alternative to a fine and will require an offender to attend three meeting with a supervisor in order to explore the reasons for their continued involvement in prostitution and identify possible routes out.

The Home Office has produced guidance to support these orders to be used by the police, the courts and specialist support services.

http://www.crimereduction.homeoffice.go ... ime013.htm





.

[Marc of Frankfurt]

Mehr Schutz für ausgebeutete Prostituierte

Der Bordellbesuch könnte für Freier in Großbritannien demnächst teuer werden - wenn die käuflichen Damen sexuell ausgebeutet werden.


HENDRIK BEBBER
London

Käuflicher Sex kann für Freier in Großbritannien seit Monatsbeginn ein krimineller Akt werden. Ein neues Gesetz stellt den Kontakt mit Prostituierten unter hohe Strafen, wenn nachgewiesen wird, dass die Kunden die Abhängigkeit der Frauen ausnützen. Dies ist der Fall wenn die "Sexarbeiterinnen" mit ihrem Verdienst beispielsweise Drogenabhängigkeit finanzieren oder von Zuhältern ausgebeutet werden. [Und was ist wenn sie mit der Sexarbeit das Glücksgefühl finanzieren, welches die Sorge um eigene Kinder bedeutet? Anm.]

Nach schwedischem Vorbild werden von nun an nicht die Frauen, sondern ihre Kunden strafrechtlich verfolgt. Hauptziel der neuen Bestimmungen ist die alarmierend zugenommene "Sexsklaverei": Frauen aus Osteuropa, Afrika und Asien werden von Schlepperbanden mit der Aussicht auf Arbeit nach Großbritannien geschleust und enden dann in der Prostitution [So beschreibt man die ungewünschte Migration in ungeregelte, ungewünschte Tätigkeiten. Anm.].

Wer die Dienste solcher Frauen nutzt, muss mit einer Geldstrafe bis zu 1000 Pfund und einem Eintrag ins Vorstrafenregister rechnen.

Die verurteilten Männer werden zudem in den Lokalzeitungen mit vollem Namen an den Pranger gestellt.

Besonders hart wird gegen Freier auf dem Autostrich durchgegriffen: Wer dort ertappt wird, kann den Führerschein und sein Auto verlieren.

Unwissenheit schützt nicht vor Strafe.

Die Kunden von Prostituierten müssen sich laut Gesetz vor jedem Besuch vergewissern, dass die Frauen nicht ausgebeutet werden.

Offiziell gibt es in Großbritannien keine Bordelle, dafür bieten selbst in Kleinstädten "Massagesalons" ihre Dienste an. Der Straßenstrich in Großstädten wurde zur Landplage. Nach regierungsamtlichen Schätzungen zählt die Sexindustrie auf der Insel rund 80 000 Beschäftigte.

Die neuen Bestimmungen reformieren die 50 Jahre alten Gesetze zur Prostitution. Damit begräbt die britische Regierung auch die in den letzten Jahren diskutierten Vorschläge, Bordelle in speziellen "Rotlichtvierteln" zu legalisieren. Die Sexarbeiterinnen, die dies seit langem fordern, finden die neuen Regelungen "zu puritanisch", wie Cari Mitchell, die Sprecherin des "Englischen Prostituierten-Kollektivs", erklärte. "Die Regierung sollte lieber den Frauen helfen, anstatt es für sie schwerer zu machen."

http://www.suedwest-aktiv.de/landundwel ... rtikel.php





.

[Arum]

          

Die Kunden von Prostituierten müssen sich laut Gesetz vor jedem Besuch vergewissern, dass die Frauen nicht ausgebeutet werden.

Heisst aber auch, dass die Polizei im Vorfeld schon über den illegalen Status dieser SW informiert sein muss, und sie dann als Köder verwendet.

[Arum]

Thursday, 22 April 2010
URGENT ACTION ALERT
Posted by Douglas fox




Below is a call for action to support Claire Finch issued by the ECP (English Collective of Prostitutes). This prosecution is proof that the new laws are being used as sex workers and our allies warned that they would be used. They are being used to endanger women. They are being used to prosecute women who have committed the heinous crime of working together for safety and for expecting the police to protect them from violent criminals. The police however using the legislation introduced by this labour government and supported by Harriet Harman and other women ministers and applauded and campaigned for by the likes of Julie Bindel and Finn MacKay and other groups and individuals who jokingly call themselves feminists has as foretold resulted in the prosecution and criminalising of women. I would urge that we not only support Claire Finch by writing to:

Sarah Brown, Luton Crown Prosecution Service, sarah.brown2@cps.gsi.gov.uk. Copy to Nazir Afzal, nazir.afzal@cps.gsi.gov.uk, and to ourselves.


But that we also write to the ministers and MPs who supported these laws and remind those groups and organisations such as Poppy, the London Feminist coalition and Object that this is what happens when they campaign against sex workers rights and against the freedom of women to be allowed to make choices about their labour and to foolishly expect the protection of the law. It is not traffickers or ugly misogynistic pimps who suffer but women and men and the ordinary people who work within this industry and who use this industry. The responsibility for the human suffering caused by unjust and repressive laws lies with them and no one else.

[...]

On 19 November 2008, 20 uniformed police officers from Kempston Economic Crime Unit, kicked in Ms Finch’s front door and searched every room in the house including Ms Finch’s personal belongings, taking over £700 from her purse that had been put aside to pay the mortgage. Her laptop computer, mobile phone, driving licence and passport were also taken. No receipt was given.

[...]

For working collectively in a safe non-exploitative way, Ms Finch faces losing her home and a prison sentence of up to seven years. The laws which allow such prosecutions must be abolished and prostitution must be decriminalised. Safety comes first.


http://www.harlots-parlour.com/2010/04/ ... alert.html

[Marc of Frankfurt]

Laura Agustín hat in ihrem Blog jetzt auch mehr Infos über den Fall:


Die Polizei hat eine wirtschaftliche Motivation für Razzien, weil sie darf einen Anteil des beschlagnahmten Geldes behalten.

Sexarbeiter in UK bekommen bei Razzien konfisziertes Geld meist nicht zurück.


Teufelskreis




________________





Police boost funds from assets taken in raids on prostitutes

The English Collective of Prostitutes says a 'moral crusade' is under way based on the mistaken belief that sex workers are all controlled by criminal gangs


The English Collective of Prostitutes blames the trend on politicians leading a misplaced 'moral crusade'.

An increasing number of prostitutes who work from home, often for safety reasons, are being prosecuted, according to the organisation that represents English sex workers.

The English Collective of Prostitutes (ECP) says the women face up to seven years in prison if found guilty under brothel-keeping charges. It blames the trend on politicians leading a misplaced "moral crusade" against prostitution that it says is driving the industry further underground.

The collective says the case of Claire Finch, who will appear at Luton crown court tomorrow to deny charges of brothel-keeping, is a typical example of how changes in attitudes to prostitution have resulted in more sex offenders being criminalised. Finch, a single mother, worked out of her home in shifts with three other women. The women, all over 40, shared expenses and are adamant it was a relationship of equals.

"My main thing was safety," Finch said. "It's not safe to work on your own. With two of us you had back-up, you had camaraderie." In November 2008, 20 police officers broke down Finch's front door and searched her house, taking £700 from her purse that she says had been put aside to pay the mortgage. Her laptop computer, mobile phone, driving licence and passport were also taken. No receipt was given.

Since she was raided, Finch has been forced to work alone. Her neighbours have no complaints about her activities and will attend court tomorrow to support her. Carrie Mitchell, of the ECP, said: "It used to be relatively rare for police to bring prosecutions for brothel-keeping but this has changed; it's being driven by a moral crusade.".

Under the Proceeds of Crime Act, the police keep 25% of any assets confiscated from raids, the Crown Prosecution Service keeps another 25%, and the Inland Revenue the rest [50%].

The ECP said this has meant that police and prosecutors have a vested interest in raiding alleged brothels. "Even if no one is charged, the money is rarely returned," the collective stated. "Women lose not only their livelihood but their home, car, life savings, jewellery, and so on. This theft by law enforcement is the worst form of pimping."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/ ... -ecp-gangs





.

[Arum]

Law on brothels puts prostitutes at risk

Preventing sex workers operating together makes them more vulnerable to attack – we need a more pragmatic approach


Diane Taylor
guardian.co.uk, Monday 3 May 2010 14.00 BST

The laws governing sex for sale are clear – it is legal for one person to sell sex to another as long as elements including soliciting, trafficking, coercion and under-18s are not involved. However, if sex workers operate together they are breaking the law.

During its review of prostitution the government considered allowing more than one person to work together on the grounds that it would improve safety and would encourage those involved in street prostitution to work indoors, making them less vulnerable to attack. Much to the consternation of sex workers and their advocates, the government ultimately decided not to pursue this proposal.

But last week Claire Finch, 49, was cleared by a jury at Luton crown court of running a brothel – a decision described by some sections of the media as throwing Britain's "antiquated" prostitution laws into confusion. Finch admitted offering topless massages with "happy endings" from her bungalow in the quiet Bedfordshire village of Chalton. Up to four women worked from her home offering a range of massage and sexual services. There was no trafficking, coercion, drugs or under-age girls involved, and no public nuisance caused. Indeed, two of Finch's neighbours – one a woman of 85 – gave evidence on her behalf.

Few cases of this kind come to court because those charged with such offences do not want to have their names dragged through the courts and the media and quietly plead guilty. However, Finch was determined to fight the case in the hope of setting a precedent allowing sex workers to operate collectively in order to protect themselves.

"This is a victory for women who want to do this work from the safety of their houses. I will do whatever I can to campaign to have the law changed," said Finch. She was backed by the English Collective of Prostitutes who hailed the court's decision and said it greatly strengthens the case for the decriminalisation of prostitution.

Finch's legal team called on parliament to clarify the law.

Finch told the court that after she was charged she began working alone from home and was attacked by one customer, a problem she had never had when working with others. The UK Network of Sex Work Projects has also expressed concern about the dangers of working alone. Jane Ayres, manager of the Praed Street Project in central London, which provides health services for sex workers, has said that tougher laws surrounding women working together from the same premises has led to a sharp increase in them working alone from their own homes and increasing the risks to their safety.

"Two and a half years ago we had 40 or 50 traditional flats on our outreach round. All but eight of them have disappeared. The majority of outreach now is to women working alone, often in their own homes As a result of these changes established health services are finding it harder to engage with potentially vulnerable women," she said.

The laws preventing sex workers from operating together are leading to more dangerous working practices rather than ending prostitution. It is vital that the law intervenes where trafficking, coercion or public nuisance are involved and that proper support is given to victims to leave prostitution. But whoever is running the country after Thursday should take a long hard look at how existing legislation is putting those who make a choice to sell sex at risk and adopt a more pragmatic approach.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree ... rothel-law

[Marc of Frankfurt]

Forts.:

Freispruch für Massagesalon Betreiberin:

'Happy endings' massage boss Claire Astrid Finch cleared of running brothel


The trial of Astrid Finch is seen as a test case for prostitutes' safety

A massage parlour boss who offered "happy endings" has been cleared of running a brothel from her bungalow.

Claire Astrid Finch, 49, of Chalton Heights in Chalton, Bedfordshire, was found not guilty at Luton Crown Court of keeping a brothel for prostitution.

She took out adverts in newspapers and on the internet, selling topless massage "with happy endings".

She told the court she wanted to work with other women for the sake of "safety" and "camaraderie".

Ms Finch had denied keeping a brothel from November 2004 to November 2008 and was unanimously [einstimmig] cleared by the jury.

On 19 November 2008, she was arrested in a police raid on the bungalow in a quiet cul-de-sac.

This has been 16 months of sheer hell for me but today I have had my own happy ending
Claire Finch

Up to four other middle aged women would work from the property, but Ms Finch told police she did not provide other services but some of her colleagues did.

She would take a fee to pay for use of the premises and newspaper advertising.

The prosecution alleged Ms Finch worked as a prostitute for many years.

Anna Morris, for the defence, said her client had opened up her home because of concern for the safety of herself and others.

Ms Morris highlighted 18 incidents of serious violence against sex workers in Bedfordshire over a four-year period and said that was the "tip of the iceberg".


'Victory for women'

Miss Finch told the jury: "I wanted to work with a second person. It is not only safety, it is camaraderie.

"It wasn't all sex. A lot of clients said they like to come because it was clean and safe."

Outside court the mother of two said: "This is a victory for women who want to do this work from the safety of their houses.

"This has been 16 months of sheer hell for me but today I have had my own happy ending.

"I will now do whatever I can to campaign to have the law changed."

The International Prostitutes Collective said: "This not guilty verdict greatly strengthens the case for prostitution to be decriminalised so that women are able to work more safely together as in New Zealand."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/engl ... 652533.stm





.