Police Realizing That SESTA/FOSTA Made Their Jobs Harder; Sex Traffickers Realizing It's Made Their Job Easier

from the who-could-have-predicted dept

For many months in the discussion over FOSTA/SESTA, some of us tried to explain how problematic the bills were. Much of the focus of those discussions were about the negative impact it would have on free speech on the internet, as the way the bill was drafted would encourage greater censorship and more speech-chilling lawsuits. But as we heard from more and more people, we also realized just how incredibly damaging the bill was going to be to those it was ostensibly designed to protect. Beyond the fact that it was passed based on completely fictional claims about the size of the problem, those who actually were victims of sex trafficking began explaining -- in fairly stark terms -- how SESTA/FOSTA would put them in greater danger and almost certainly lead to deaths.

While supporters of the bill seem to insist that because the bill puts legal liability on platforms that are used for sex trafficking that it will magically make sex trafficking disappear, the reality is more complex. While we can argue about Backpage's complicity in what happened on its platform, for years it was used as a tool to protect sex workers, giving them more control over their lives and who they worked with. As we've pointed in the past, a recent study found that Craigslist, back when it had its "erotic services" section, appeared to decrease female homicide rates by an astounding 17.4%. Backpage picked up the slack when Craigslist was bullied into closing that section, but now it's gone too.

And stories are already coming in about the damage done. A recent episode of the Reply All podcast all about SESTA/FOSTA had some scary stats at the end, noting that there are already many stories of sex workers who have gone missing or been killed since the bill became law.

Motherboard has a story with much more details, noting that the passing of SESTA/FOSTA has emboldened pimps to take advantage of more victims of sex trafficking. As many sex workers had explained, Backpage actually allowed them to have more control themselves, and helped them get away from pimps. But without Backpage?

“Pimps seem to be coming out of the woodwork since this all happened,” Laura LeMoon, a sex trafficking survivor, writer, and co-founder and director of harm reduction nonprofit Safe Night Access Project Seattle, told me in an email. “They’re taking advantage of the situation sex workers are in. This is why I say FOSTA/SESTA have actually increased trafficking. I’ve had pimps contacting me. They’re leeches. They make money off of [sex workers’] misfortune.”

The Verge also has an excellent deep dive into how SESTA/FOSTA has put more women's lives at risk.

What about the claims that SESTA/FOSTA would help law enforcement (many of whom pushed for the law)? Yeah, about that: police are now realizing that it's more difficult for them to find sex traffickers without Backpage. I mean, it's not like people were explaining this a decade ago.

Meanwhile, given how many SETSA/FOSTA supporters insisted that the bill was necessary to prevent the sex trafficking scourge, you'd think that sex trafficking prosecutions and arrests would show an upswing, right? Instead, we see things like how a special court in Delaware set up specifically to focus on dealing with sex trafficking cases is shutting down due to the lack of actual sex trafficking victims. The reason the court was shut down according to the judge who shut it down?

... there was "little evidence to suggest the defendants of this court are the subjects" of sex-trafficking enterprises.

So, I'm still wondering why all of the supporters of SESTA/FOSTA seem to have disappeared off the face of the earth in the last couple months as all of this has happened. Can one of them step forward and actually defend what they've done as the evidence is showing they're literally getting people killed and making it more difficult to stop sex trafficking?


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 6:33am

    In a strange twist, all supporters of SESTA/FOSTA have fallen victim to sex traffickers. Sadly, no one was able to find out until it was too late...

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  2. identicon
    any moose cow word, 14 May 2018 @ 6:34am

    FOSTA and SESTA, like most "morality" legislation, is much more about sweeping problems under the rug and pretending they don't exist rather than doing anything substantive to address the real underlying issues.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  3. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 6:35am

    I'm sure they see it as a win in the same way they see a win when they manage to institute abstinence only sex ed and teen pregnancy goes up. As they see it, these results mean that those women are actually facing consequences for their "sins". And probably think this sort of thing will encourage more women to get out of sex work.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  4. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 6:42am

    so when is the repeal going to be filed, then? on top of that, when is the proposer and sponsors of the bill going to be publicly ridiculed, as they should, for being such numb-nuts? they were warned, but in true politician 'i am in charge, not you' fashion, all the warnings and warners were ignored!

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  5. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 6:47am

    Re:

    Being politicians, they will take the plaudits that many in the electorate will give them for being seen to do something. Those people don't oversee what the politicians do, or check its effectiveness, but cheer the politicians on for doing something, anything to deal with a problem.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  6. icon
    Ryunosuke (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 6:50am

    Re:

    Presumably the legislators and supporters of SESTA are, in a strange coincidence, also in hiding for violating SESTA as well as numerous sodomy laws for fucking US citizens, Sex workers in particular, in the ass.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  7. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 6:57am

    You mean out_of_the_blue and Richard Bennett were completely full of shit? I'm shocked, I tell you. Shocked!

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  8. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 7:01am

    Re:

    so when is the repeal going to be filed, then? on top of that, when is the proposer and sponsors of the bill going to be publicly ridiculed, as they should, for being such numb-nuts?

    Where's the "funny" button?

    Legislators being forced to repeal or take responsibility for the bad legislation they've passed? You must be joking.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  9. icon
    aerinai (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 7:04am

    More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    Par for the course for this administration. They want deterrence of sex work through fear; the same way they are handling the immigration at the southern border. A few more dead women trying to eek out a living is an acceptable trade-off in the eyes of the 'morality wing' of the Republican party...

    Kind of disgusting when you think about the value these politicians put on these women's lives...

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  10. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 7:18am

    Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    It's only the, ah, "less expensive" hookers that they oppose. The more expensive ones like the prez uses are perfectly fine.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  11. identicon
    carlb, 14 May 2018 @ 7:20am

    Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    It's only certain types of sex work that they're trying to shut down. After all, what is Trump's farce of a marriage to, what is it, Melania is #3 now, other than an economic exchange of her looks vs. his money. It's still sex work, just with a sole client and no opportunity to walk away at the end of a one-hour "appointment" or "session".

    I don't envy her position, nonetheless heterosexual marriage (as the biggest sex-for-money scam going) remains lawful in fifty states and ten provinces. Why?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  12. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 7:25am

    Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    Because it makes children and beneficiary status easy to determine. Two people agreeing to join households is about as far from sex for money as it is possible to get.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  13. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 7:32am

    Re: Re:

    Only minions are required to be responsible, all people of money are exempt from any and all responsibilities.

    It's not like the minions were not told they need to take "personal responsibility" ... they knew what they were getting into.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  14. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 8:02am

    Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    The bill had bipartisan support. So much for your theory.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  15. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 8:45am

    Re:

    dumb laws are the well accepted standard for legislation in America -- why get annoyed at just this one today?

    There are 500,000+ laws in America. How many of them do you have any opinion about?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  16. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 8:55am

    Re: Re:

    OK: I'll bite.

    We get annoyed at just this one today to bring awareness to it, so that it can be changed. Without public awareness and public shaming of public figures, we will not have change.

    So why go after one when there are 500,000+ more laws?

    Because each journey starts with a single step. Once THIS law is taken care of, there are 499,999+ laws, and we can work on the next item.

    Your attitude only results in things getting continually worse. It is the attitude the Russian troll farms use to promote apathy.

    Be part of the solution and pick a law you feel is unjust, and see it through to being removed.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  17. icon
    tom (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 8:56am

    Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    According to wiki, the votes in Congress were 388-25 in the House and 97-2 in the Senate. About as bi-partisan a bill as you can get these days.

    About what to expect from a country where two folks beating each other to a bloody pulp for money is considered acceptable sport(MMA) but if the same two engage in sex for money, horrible evil just happened.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  18. icon
    Advocate (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 9:12am

    We're focusing on the wrong thing here. What matters is that the government takes actions in spite of the best evidence and advice. What matters is that they are removing access to essential freedoms without a valid reason.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  19. identicon
    stine, 14 May 2018 @ 9:14am

    Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    Actually, it isn't "the current administration", its Republicans in general and forever.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  20. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 9:18am

    Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    2 people engaging in an activity while filming and charging to see it, it's called porn

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  21. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 9:33am

    Linked article from Tulsa, Oklahoma states: "Police look for...

    ... *more ways* to investigate trafficking without Backpage", and "Police said now that they can't set up stings on Backpage, *they've been able to focus their manpower on investigating reports of prostitution at local massage parlors.**"

    The Masnick headlines and links: "Yeah, about that: police are now realizing that it's more difficult for them to find sex traffickers without Backpage."

    So while technically "Police Realizing That SESTA/FOSTA Made Their Jobs Harder", that just means they aren't sitting at a computer munching doughnuts, but out engaged with community. -- And that's bad how?

    ONE medium Midwestern proves all, when The Masnick needs it to!

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  22. This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 9:34am

    And, uh, er, NO, I can't "defend against" all your wild claims!

    Too many of them is your tactic. So far just made up by people like you who opposed SESTA. You're just claiming "right all along" way before any offical evidence is in!

    The open advertising Masnick advocates inevitably leads to increase of prostitution. Sure, "libertarians" say "okay, it's their choice". But NO society ever prospers with prostitution. All societies, even at present, forbid or suppress because bad and leads to worse.

    Clearly Masnick favors pimps / procurers / prostitutes over civil society. Put with his support for copyright piracy and anti-police, shows he's in The Thieve's Guild.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  23. identicon
    ryuugami, 14 May 2018 @ 9:39am

    So, I'm still wondering why all of the supporters of SESTA/FOSTA seem to have disappeared off the face of the earth in the last couple months as all of this has happened.

    Obviously, they're busy pimping.

    The only rational reason to support SESTA/FOSTA is if you always wanted to be a pimp, but were too afraid of being caught. That obstacle has now been removed.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  24. icon
    stderric (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 9:50am

    Re: Re:

    dumb laws are the well accepted standard for legislation in America -- why get annoyed at just this one today?

    I'm pretty sure most techdirt readers are both aware of and annoyed at a shitload of dumb laws today, not just this one. It just happens to be the dumb law that's being discussed right here, right now -- and it's more than simply 'dumb': it's effects aren't just laughably ironic, they're killing the very people legislators claim to be helping.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  25. identicon
    Thad, 14 May 2018 @ 9:52am

    Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    You really can't lay SESTA/FOSTA at Republicans' feet. As Tom noted one post up, they had overwhelming bipartisan support.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  26. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 9:53am

    Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    Again -- this time with feeling -- "Bipartisan support!"

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  27. icon
    Jinxed (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 10:01am

    Perhaps Techdirt reach out to one of the authors of the bill?
    Here, I'll help:
    https://www.mpaa.org/who-we-are/#contact-us

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  28. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 10:04am

    Re: Re:

    Follow up plot twist, they all end up in Thailand.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  29. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 10:06am

    Re: Re: Re:

    "Be part of the solution and pick a law you feel is unjust, and see it through to being removed."

    Isn't that sorta what this blog is participating in?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  30. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 10:07am

    Re:

    They also get more "volunteers" for their armies.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  31. icon
    stderric (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 10:12am

    Re: And, uh, er, NO, I can't "defend against" all your wild claims!

    You see that plastic box with seven little compartments? You might wanna check the one with the lid labeled 'M', because it sounds like it's probably still full.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  32. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 10:12am

    Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    "."

    This claim is made even when very few, sometimes only one member(s) across the aisle vote for said bill. Then the claim is made as though all members of the opposing party agree and voted for it. I call this Fake Bipartisan Support.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  33. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 10:13am

    Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    So, boxing then ...

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  34. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 10:14am

    Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    TIL - 2 out of 50 is overwhelming

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  35. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 10:16am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    opps 2 out of 100

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  36. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 10:16am

    Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    What does that mean?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  37. icon
    Kal Zekdor (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 10:18am

    Re: And, uh, er, NO, I can't "defend against" all your wild claims!

    ...because prohibition turned out great.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  38. icon
    That One Guy (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 10:19am

    Utter indifference to suffering vs. Outright engaging in it

    The only rational reason to support SESTA/FOSTA is if you always wanted to be a pimp, but were too afraid of being caught. That obstacle has now been removed.

    Oh not the only reason, there's also wanting to use their 'services' but worrying about getting caught. By brushing the problem under the rug it's much safer for pimps now, and therefore easier to make use of what they're offering.

    However, to be fair, this is probably putting way more thought into the matter than the overwhelming majority of those that voted for it and/or who supported it. Most of them probably didn't get past 'It will stop sex trafficking!', or in the case of politicians 'It will make it look like I give a damn about the people I couldn't care less about!'

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  39. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 10:27am

    Re: Utter indifference to suffering vs. Outright engaging in it

    … those that voted for it…

    In the traditional, pre-internet model:   Protection money goes to the vice squad. A cut goes to the DA's office. Some of the DA's take gets sliced off the top for the state AG's office.

    Local DAs —especially big-city DAs— and state AGs are intensely political creatures. They naturally donate to Congressional election campaigns, and other worthy causes.

    Internet disintermediation messed with the middlemen.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  40. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 10:29am

    Re: Re: And, uh, er, NO, I can't "defend against" all your wild claims!

    It did, for the Mafia.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  41. icon
    That One Guy (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 10:41am

    Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    Senate numbers

    House numbers

    If you want to claim that in general one party is more in favor of putting forth these sorts of bills you're welcome to present evidence for that, but as for this bill? Yeah, the support was pretty evenly split between the two parties(how much of that was true support vs 'If I vote against this I'll be slammed for supporting sex trafficking, it won't affect me, so I'll vote for it anyway' is unknown however).

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  42. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 10:45am

    Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=115&sessi on=2&vote=00060

    This definitely proves his point. Democrats hate poor sex workers as much as Republicans.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  43. identicon
    ryuugami, 14 May 2018 @ 10:49am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    AKA, violence porn.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  44. identicon
    ryuugami, 14 May 2018 @ 10:59am

    Re: Utter indifference to suffering vs. Outright engaging in it

    However, to be fair, this is probably putting way more thought into the matter than the overwhelming majority of those that voted for it and/or who supported it. Most of them probably didn't get past 'It will stop sex trafficking!', or in the case of politicians 'It will make it look like I give a damn about the people I couldn't care less about!'

    As I said, pimping (or, as you point out, using their services) is the only rational reason. These are irrational.

    What I'm doing is, I'm giving them a benefit of the doubt. Either they're doing this to profit off of and/or exploit some of the most vulnerable members of society, or they're so stupid they need to be institutionalized.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  45. icon
    CrushU (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 11:30am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    It means that there is little or no correlation between the party of the representative and whether he voted for the bill.

    In other words, if you took one random Congressperson, the odds are more likely than not that they would support the bill.

    Further, knowing how they voted on the bill does not allow you to guess their party affiliation with better than 50% accuracy. (Yes, technically there are more than two parties so it'd be lower than 50%, but that's pretty minimal.)

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  46. icon
    Kal Zekdor (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 11:31am

    Re: Re: Utter indifference to suffering vs. Outright engaging in it

    Voting for the bill because it furthers their political career regardless of consequences is perfectly rational. Cold-blooded, but rational.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  47. identicon
    wayout, 14 May 2018 @ 11:32am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    You might seriously want to actually look at the voting results instead of imagining what you WANT it to be...

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  48. icon
    That One Guy (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 11:34am

    Re: Re: Utter indifference to suffering vs. Outright engaging in it

    How is 'It's good PR, and the negatives don't impact me so why would I care?' not rational? They get the gains, someone else has to deal with the losses.

    It's twisted and disgusting to be sure, but it is rational so long as you're not trying to square it with actually caring about the victims held up as justification for the bill rather than just claiming to.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  49. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 1:05pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    ...your approach is noble but ultimately futile. You deal with symptoms not causes.

    There are about 40,000 legislative bodies in the U.S. in addition to Congress and 50 state legislatures. They churn out thousands of new, dumb laws every year. You can't possibly counter or even mildly mitigate that deluge with your approach

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  50. icon
    That One Guy (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 1:17pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Alright, so what's your alternative?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  51. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 1:27pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    Are you saying the prior post by Tom is incorrect?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  52. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 1:28pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    Senate:

    Vote Counts:
    YEAs 97
    NAYs 2
    Not Voting 1

    Look to be split right down the middle?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  53. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 1:31pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    But no numbers, no plus/minus tolerances, nothing at all for consistent determination - so wild ass claims then.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  54. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 1:32pm

    Re: Re: Re: Utter indifference to suffering vs. Outright engaging in it

    and indicates they are no doing their job

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  55. icon
    Coyne Tibbets (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 1:37pm

    Mission accomplished

    So, I'm still wondering why all of the supporters of SESTA/FOSTA seem to have disappeared off the face of the earth in the last couple months as all of this has happened. 

    Well, duh! Mission accomplished. Appropriate sex worker sin penalties (death, disease, abuse) have been restored. Onward, onward, to punish other sins.

    If it starts to look like FOSTA/SESTA might be repealed then the supporters will reappear like magic.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  56. icon
    ECA (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 1:56pm

    Even without Sesta/fosta..

    Its for the Children is correct..

    JUST the creation of this LAW, and the interview is going to FORCE THESE PEOPLE UNDERGROUND..

    You have taken the RABBIT out of the HOLE and explained to him HOW we hunt rabbits, THEN RELEASED HIM..
    SOON, every rabbit will know HOW you hunt them..

    You have made a pamphlet, a book, a FLAG to wave over everything ABOUT THIS... And those rabbits are going to DIG DEEPER, LEARN WHEN HUNTING SEASON IS...then HIDE someplace else..

    YOU have focused on 1 avenue of the SOURCE(the internet) and NOT the others..
    The internet is very Deep, and many things can be hidden, and these person WERE IDIOTS TO POST TO A PUBLIC LISTING... THEY MADE A MISTAKE, and you are thinking a Bill like this is going to solve WHAT??
    YOU WONT see this in public now..
    You will go DEEPER into the net to find it..IT WILL STILL BE THERE..eating your carrots..

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  57. icon
    JoeCool (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 2:08pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Crazy idea that would never get implemented: Once you hit 10000 laws (just an example), you are required to remove a law from the books in order to add a new law.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  58. icon
    That One Guy (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 2:14pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    As far as party affiliation? Basically yes.

    The nays were split 1/1 R/D.

    The yays were split 49/46/2 R/D/I.

    Not voting, 1 R.

    If you're not talking party affiliation, and are saying that it had overwhelming support in general in the senate, then yes, that is true, but it's also not something I see anyone disagreeing with.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  59. icon
    stderric (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 2:29pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    Hm, I just felt a disturbing wave of pity for statistics, probability, and discrete mathematics run through my body. Weird.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  60. identicon
    Thad, 14 May 2018 @ 2:31pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Great. So now every law is actually a thousand smaller laws.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  61. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 2:41pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    This is why you do not wrestle with a pig.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  62. icon
    Stephen T. Stone (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 3:20pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    The blog offers you awareness of a problem. It cannot do the legwork of contacting your representatives or expressing your grievances with a given law. You have to do that for yourself.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  63. icon
    Stephen T. Stone (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 3:22pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Self-defeatism is easy; you never have to worry about an outcome if you do not try. If the idea of your hard work ending in a negative result scares you into apathy and cowardice, stay home and let the brave do what you cannot.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  64. icon
    Stephen T. Stone (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 3:28pm

    Re:

    Police officers engaging with a community means nothing if the community cannot or does not want to help the police. The elimination of a useful tool in finding potential sex trafficking victims means those involved in that sordid business go further underground. The cops can also look into local massage parlors, but they are not the only source of sex trafficking victims. And if you think these issues are limited to midwestern towns, you might want to think about whether midwestern towns are the only towns with cops and sex trafficking issues.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  65. identicon
    Lawrence D’Oliveiro, 14 May 2018 @ 4:07pm

    Re: you are required to remove a law from the books in order to

    What’s to stop them from removing that law?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  66. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 6:31pm

    Re:

    "Can't defend against claims"? But you said this law was going to solve everything from copyright infringement to cancer! Wow, it's almost like you were completely full of shit from the get go!

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  67. icon
    JoeCool (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 6:59pm

    Re: Re: you are required to remove a law from the books in order to

    You make it a constitutional amendment rather than a law.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  68. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 14 May 2018 @ 7:58pm

    Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    Two people agreeing to join households is about as far from sex for money as it is possible to get.

    Sounds like you got screwed the wrong way when you got married.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  69. icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 14 May 2018 @ 9:53pm

    Oh look, everything people warned would happen happened.
    Of course there isn't a long history of laws passed to fix X that cause many more problems than they end up causing... *cough Patriot Act*.

    People demand the government fix things... ignoring that they only fix things that somehow benefit them.
    They want to tell us that sexual harassment is a horrible thing, when their own policies punish those who report & they managed to create a slush fund of tax dollars to quietly pay settlements when their members harassed others.

    The "evidence" claims that there are 0 - 52 billion trafficked children being pimped out every day.
    The "evidence" claims that sex workers are only doing it because they are forced (usually while they are trying to cover sex workers mouths to keep them from saying that isn't true).
    The "evidence" supports the position that they have no clue what actually is happening & that believing "experts", who make more money the larger the problem appears, want to make themselves unemployed.

    We need to stop allowing those moral minded people from hijacking issues to impose their morals on everyone else.

    Sex between consenting adults (paid or not) should be decriminalized.
    Rules killing off websites that help sex workers run their business, should be stricken.

    We need to stop making larger haystacks that allow the 'bad guys' much more cover.
    Stop forcing all sex workers into the shadows so that police have to check each & every shadow to see if it is someone forced into it.

    The hysteria does not live upto the hype.
    There are a few cases of bad actors doing this, but everyone wants to shift the blame as widely as possible to ignore their own roles in what happened.

    If client could login to hooker.com & get a professional sex worker without having to play games... wouldn't that make ads on BP not really needed for pros? So pimps trying to sell kids would stick out much more?

    Decriminalize, demarginalize sex workers. Try listening to them as actual people who know how the game works & their wisdom of how to find & stop the bad guys.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  70. identicon
    Wendy Cockcroft, 15 May 2018 @ 2:36am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: More 'Acceptable' Collateral Damage

    LOL @ both of you. I'm married because I wanted to be with my husband. To join households, as AC @ 14 May 2018 @ 7:25am so eloquently put it.

    I'm not really gaining in terms of money; I make more than he does. This is common in many households so can we please stop denigrating marriage just because some people think of it as a career move?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  71. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 15 May 2018 @ 4:51am

    Can we stop with the "women" crap?

    "The Verge also has an excellent deep dive into how SESTA/FOSTA has put more women's lives at risk."

    Men are sex workers, too.

    I am one of them, and I'm more likely to be harmed, exploited and killed because everyone's focused on teh wimmenz.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  72. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 15 May 2018 @ 5:58am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    This would just mean the law can't keep up with changes to technology and society.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  73. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 15 May 2018 @ 8:21am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Thank you Capt Obvious.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  74. icon
    John85851 (profile), 15 May 2018 @ 11:28am

    Re:

    "so when is the repeal going to be filed, then?"
    I would say, never.
    Even though there's a lot of evidence saying the law actually hurts people, politicians passed it assuming it helped people. They're not going to go back on their campaign promises to get the law passed and then say they were wrong.
    Like other posters have said, this is a morality law and politicians rarely, if ever, change their stance on morality.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  75. identicon
    Will B., 15 May 2018 @ 3:43pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Pardon the tin foil hat, but I do kinda wonder if that wasn't the actual point of the law. Passed with the intent of making harassing or killing "undesirables" easier...

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  76. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 15 May 2018 @ 6:46pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    "wasn't the actual point of the law. Passed with the intent of making harassing or killing "undesirables" easier..."of course, silly rabbit...

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  77. identicon
    superkuh, 15 May 2018 @ 8:33pm

    Sex work is not sex trafficking.

    Techdirt should not adopt the twisted language of the police and call all sex work "sex trafficking". That was what allowed this travesty of a law to be passed in the first place.

    I get that by adopting the premises of the doublespeak you can highlight the failure of the bill with irony, but in doing so you're only reinforcing the core concept of the bill: that sex work of all kinds is sex trafficking. That is dangerous in and of itself.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  78. icon
    That One Guy (profile), 15 May 2018 @ 10:18pm

    You don't say

    Read the article again(I just did), and point out where TD mixes the two, because I'm certainly not seeing it.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  79. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2018 @ 12:12am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Utter indifference to suffering vs. Outright engaging in it

    Not doing their job according to who? If their respective constituents claim to be in favor of a bill then voting for the bill will seem like getting the job done. If you mean that a senator is supposed to make carefully thought out decisions in favor of the constitution and all people in America, well then of course they aren't going tying the job done.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  80. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 16 May 2018 @ 6:23am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    If I save 50 lives from an earthquake the are those lives I saved worthless if 20,000 other people die?

    If we go by your logic theirs no point in doing ANYTHING if you can't personally solve every problem.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  81. identicon
    superkuh, 16 May 2018 @ 10:05am

    Re: You don't say

    Sure. In this article title it's calling all pimps that are requesting sex workers to work for them sex traffickers. This aligns with the twisted language which denies individual autonomy and volition to the sex workers, making any such arrangment automatically a coercive use of force even if no such use of force exists.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  82. identicon
    MPAA, 16 May 2018 @ 10:43am

    Re:

    "Who we are

    We are lying scumbags who exploit the true creators of art, good or bad. We don't create anything, we just play middlemen and suck all of their money... and yours."

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  83. icon
    That One Guy (profile), 16 May 2018 @ 11:43am

    Re: Re: You don't say

    “Pimps seem to be coming out of the woodwork since this all happened,” Laura LeMoon, a sex trafficking survivor, writer, and co-founder and director of harm reduction nonprofit Safe Night Access Project Seattle, told me in an email. “They’re taking advantage of the situation sex workers are in. This is why I say FOSTA/SESTA have actually increased trafficking. I’ve had pimps contacting me. They’re leeches. They make money off of [sex workers’] misfortune.”

    The implications there are pretty clear to me, pimps are taking advantage of the situation with regards to people who wouldn't have gotten involved with them otherwise, which would seem to fall just fine into the 'coercive use of force' category. The rest of the time the quote is talking about sex workers in general.

    Outside of that quote by someone else, are there any portions of the article that you can find that conflate the two, and that aren't simply using the term 'sex trafficking' because that's the ones who passed the bill used to justify it?

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  84. identicon
    Jay, 18 May 2018 @ 5:36am

    It's working this way

    Well it's working at least one way

    I had someone apply for a job at my place that actually said they were making a living posting girls on Backpage and then now they can't do that anymore so that's re getting a job.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  85. identicon
    Anon, 20 May 2018 @ 12:34pm

    Was never about sex trafficking

    This law was always about making prostitution harder. Trafficking arguments were cynically concocted made to garner support because far too many thinking people don't feel consensual prostitution should be illegal. A very passionate minority disagree and this is their work.

    I believe sex traffickers were not generally benefiting from Backpage etc. and only the really stupid or reckless ones would do something that public. Prostitutes on the other hand definitely took a big hit.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

  86. icon
    Bergman (profile), 20 May 2018 @ 4:16pm

    Re: Was never about sex trafficking

    Didn't you know? Prostitution is considered human trafficking. Even if the 'vendor' is an owner-operator.

    reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.