Universalis, your very own breviary in pixels...

Sunday, 16 August 2015

How To Boil a Frog

Amnesty International has adopted a proposal calling for the decriminalization of the sex trade, to promote "human rights" and "equal protection" for sex workers.
This proposal instead gives amnesty to pimps, brothel owners and sex buyers by recognizing everyone in sex work as “consenting adults.” Men and women in the vulnerable position of selling their bodies for sex should be offered services and solutions to provide them with safe alternatives.
But as Cindy McCain, the chairman of the Human Trafficking Advisory Council of the McCain Institute for International Leadership, continues in the Washington Post -
The proposal instead legalizes their exploitation. Amnesty International says that people who engage in sex work often do so because they have been marginalized and have limited choices. The decision to sell one’s body for sex made in the absence of better circumstances is not a human right. A buyer or trafficker who takes advantage of someone’s lack of choice for their own financial or sexual gain is an exploiter of human rights and should be criminalized.
Sex work and sex trafficking cannot reasonably be separated. Sex work fuels the demand for commercial sex, which is the indisputable driving force behind the sex-trafficking industry. Supply will always meet demand, and in this equation, supply is too often vulnerable men and women, and, at its very worst, children. Under the group’s proposal, sex traffickers and brothel owners could operate with immunity for facilitating what they say is consensual sex work. Protections should not be afforded to those who prey on a person’s vulnerability or lack of basic needs. Decriminalizing sex work would put those in the sex industry, and vulnerable populations around the world, in greater danger by giving no authority to go after those who exploit others for personal profit
It's not as if society's refusal to name virtually any sexual activity at all, no matter how loathsome, as indecent hasn't set us one this path.
I'm guessing that was the reason for the NYTimes op-ed piece by the lap dancer - it was published by way of greasing the skids for this newest outrage.
And we're accustomed to outrages, so really what is a little more?
Gradualism can be useful, huh? Soon, nothing will make us jump out of the pot.

Image result for boil a frog
I missed the piece in the Times to which Catholic World Report refers here-
The new policy would also theoretically encourage better health care for women in prostitution and reduce the stigma involved with the industry.
Preceding Amnesty's decision, the New York Times published a piece on the slippery slope of the sex industry – calling it a vague, gray area, especially when it comes to its decriminalization.

“Can we really draw a bright line between a person who has casual sex, in private, with various lovers, and a person who has sex in private, with various short-term and long-term lovers, from whom she accepts monetary support?” the piece asks, arguing that private, consensual acts – whatever they may be – have a right to be protected.

No comments: