Friday, 14 August 2015

Response to a prostitution apologist


I came across this kyle Kulinski video regarding Amnesty's decision to decriminalise sex workers, pimps and brothels.  His analysis of things is often very intelligent and he is passionate about what he is discussing. But this time I feel that he hasn’t done his research.

He backs up his claims from a t.v reality show and says "Go ask the girls at the bunny ranch"

He makes two main arguments -

One is a strawman, saying that everybody who is against legalising prostitution is old fashioned and puritanical. That sex is wrong and paying for sex is just immoral on the face of it. Also that we are calling everybody who says that they are happy in prostitution liars.

The second is a composition fallacy. Saying that prostitution is always better when it is legal. He makes the comparison between alcohol prohibition, and how making it illegal made the situation worse. And assumes that the case is the same with prostitution.

The reason we are against it, is because we can see that even in cases where prostitution is legal, there is still exploitation.

Here is an example of a mega brothel in Germany, where prostitution is legal. It was recently raided by police under suspicion of human trafficking, forced prostitution and fraud.

'Josie, who’s 23 and has spent four years in the sex trade, reckons she has slept with 15,000 men. The key item in her make-up bag is a tube of Xylocaine, a local anaesthetic gel that numbs the inevitable physical pain that results from sleeping with up to 20 men a day.'


A report on the legal sex industry in Nevada, showing how it really works in a legal brothel.

"Legalising this industry does not result in the closing down of illegal sex establishments," says Farley, "it merely gives them further permission to exist."

 A 2-year research study of Nevada legal and illegal prostitution and sex trafficking reveals human rights violations against women in the Nevada legal brothels.


Testimonial from an former sex worker.

"What happens in legal brothels is sexual harassment, sexual exploitation and sometimes rape," Farley said. "Despite the claims to the contrary, legal prostitution does not protect women from the violence, verbal abuse, physical injury or diseases such as HIV that occur in illegal prostitution."




Thursday, 13 August 2015

The betrayal of a human rights organization



Today, Amnesty International voted for the global decriminalisation of  'Sex work' because 'Sex workers' are marginalised and face constant risk of violence and abuse'. Now I wonder who on earth could possibly exploit, own, sell, rape, violently assault and murder these girls and women?
 It couldn't be the flesh traders and buyers could it, after all they totally love and respect their merchandise and they would never dream of forcing a girl into that kind of 'work' Even though, one of their motto’s is  'Why sell drugs once when you can sell one girl thousands of times'  And what of those who 'choose' this work? Maybe some do- But our concern is the millions who don't. Those who are coerced or forced. Those who are desperately poor. Or those who have unresolved PTSD. As any therapist can tell you, there is a strong link between child & adolescent sexual abuse and long term high risk sexual behaviours. Especially present when the victim is substance addicted.

 I, along with many other advocates and sex trafficking victims are mortified, sickened and angry at a 'Human rights' movement who are normalising and protecting men's rights to buy and use girls/woman's bodies however and  whenever they wish, in order to satisfy their sexual deviancies, power and hatred. Amnesty states that 'Sex workers' will be safer and that it will lessen sex trafficking. Really? None had reported being victims of this violence, which they considered "part of the job". I think they have listened to a lot of pimp talk, because even in countries where it is legal like Germany. Girls and women are suffering from their abusive clients and being trafficked within legal brothels. And are you really that naïve to think that the pimps and brothel owners will treat their 'workers' with dignity and respect. And that they will not provide young girls..When the demand for young girls is escalating beyond measure, in countries whether it's legal,illegal, decriminalised or not. It does not matter to the flesh traders, because they are only interested in PROFITS. Ask yourselves this-
Who else would profit, if 'sex work' was decriminalised.

Amnesty denies and dismisses survivors, treating them like defects that don't deserve a voice..

In  Decriminalised New Zealand in 2013..
Former prostitutes and their advocates are calling for clients of sex workers to be prosecuted, saying the decriminalisation of the industry has failed them

 Full pdf of petition and more reading here-

Sexual slavery, forced drug-taking in Decriminalised NSW brothels on the rise

 
Pimps force under-age girls to work in Nevada brothels, Oregon police say

"What happens in legal brothels is sexual harassment, sexual exploitation and sometimes rape,

Nevada declared most dangerous and lethal state for the sex industry

 Romania's disappearing girls


 I feel that they have made this decision from the purses of pimps. Because money talks and the sex industry talks billions of profits, made from the holes of young girls and women who often don't have the choice. For example, Domestic abuse and impoverished parents selling their own daughters. I could cite references for months, maybe years. But I don't have that luxury of time and besides, you don't have to be an expert, a professional, an academic, a feminist or a survivor to understand that mentally healthy girls and women would never sell their flesh to many men a day in order to "pay their bills or have a flexible work schedule", as you stated in your draft. You never once mentioned the mental health, PTSD and serious drug addictions of many of these women. The self sexual denigration and dissociation that occurs in most adolescents who were sexually abused by men. Yes, by all means decriminalise prostituted people and help them to attain health and social care. You need to criminalise the flesh traders who exploit and the buyers who create the demand. But, you won't do that will you Amnesty. You believe that men are entitled to women's bodies and need to fulfil their sexual desires. Why don't you read the language of the buyers and understand, that it's not about sex. It is the same as rape. It's about power, control and hate. Good men don't use women, good men love women.
 Amnesty International​ - You have demonstrated today, that you have ignored and dismissed the countless victims and survivors of sex trafficking. And that you have assigned girls and women a second class status and you have jeopardised millions more vulnerable women and children, who will be at greater risk at the hands of flesh traders and buyers across the globe. Your actions and watching you all celebrate with your glasses of champagne today, have caused myself and many others who were forced by pimps into prostitution. Utter distress, disbelief, anger and emotions that triggered and exacerbated our traumas, beyond words.

Congratulations.


Monday, 25 August 2014

The taking and killing of Logan Marr

The taking and killing of Logan Marr.





Within my daily research about child and adult abuse, I have to remain detached from the subject matter. In order to paint or write about it, for reasons to advocate or educate. But on rare occasions, I can become very emotionally affected by certain cases. Last night, I came across this utterly tragic story about this beautiful little girl. Who had succumbed to the unbelievable stupidity, professional incompetence,selfishness and psychotic behaviour of her mother, Grandmother, child services and her foster mother.

Logan Marr met her death, strapped and bound by duct tape into a high chair in a basement. She died of asphyxiation.

Her foster mother Sally Schofield, who was a case worker for Maine's Department of Human Services. Could not cope with Logan's 'Tantrums' So decided to wrap forty feet of duct tape around Logan's body, head and mouth. Force her into a babies high chair and leave her in the basement of her house, whilst Schofield went back to her kitchen to prepare dinner.

When Schofield went back to the basement to check on Logan. She was already dead. Schofield then phoned the authorities and claimed that Logan must of accidentally caused the high chair to topple, thus banging her head and causing her death.
During the police investigation, they found forty feet of duct tape which contained clumps of Logan's hair. Schofield then changed her story and said that Logan tried to bound herself and then she 'demonstrated' how to do it, by wrapping it around her.

Schofield had two of her own children; Both boys. She said that she had wanted a girl, but could not of guaranteed to conceive one. So she decided to adopt a girl. And even though the DHS discouraged caseworkers from adopting children within their system. Schofield had gotten around it. She was highly respected by her colleagues and the department. Schofield fostered both Logan and her little sister Bailey on the understanding that the girls did not have 'Behaviours'.

Logan Marr had first been taken away from her birth mother Christy Marr because a caseworker had decided that she was too immature and irresponsible to care for a child. And that Christy's mother Kathy Marr had told the DHS that Christy often yelled and handled Logan too roughly. You can read the rest of the story here
The taking of Logan Marr

Logan Marr did unfortunately demonstrate the 'Behaviours' That Schofield did not want. Who was assured by the DHS that she did not have. She wanted a 'Perfect' well behaved little girl.
But Logan Marr's 'Behaviours' were evident when they first took her away from her mom. They were evident the second time they took her away from her mom. And they were evident during the time she was placed with her third foster mother Schofield. They were even more evident when during a supervised Christmas visit, Logan (Instead of unwrapping her presents) told her mom that "Sally had hurt her. That she had wrapped her in a blanket and squeezed her face really hard" But, Christy was not allowed to say anything to Logan about it, for fear of thwarting their supervised visits together.


Schofield finally silenced this emotionally disturbed, little five year old girl once and for all on January 31st 2001. She callously (And most probably routinely used this punishment) Dragged Logan down to the basement, bound her body,head and mouth with duct tape and forced her into a babies high chair. And left her there while she went about her daily routine. All because Logan had an obvious,emotionally disturbed episode. And this most cruel and evil woman was not going to put up with these 'Tantrums'.

I cannot begin to imagine what this little girl went through. All the emotional pain and suffering of being taken away twice from her mother. And for no real risk. And the psychological and physical abuse that was inflicted upon her by this highly respected child case worker. The fact that Logan tried to tell the adults around her what was happening. And no one listening or believing her.
And ultimately, the suffering, pain and torture as she gasped her last breath. All alone in a basement,strapped,bound and squeezed into a tiny high chair. I would imagine...screaming inside her head for her mummy.

The taking of Logan Marr (Documentary)

 




Tuesday, 21 January 2014

The Patron Saint of Paedophiles.

The Patron Saint of Paedophiles.

Girl chat for 'Girl Lovers'

You can see an image of Alice Liddell on the right hand side

Alice Day is Paedophile pride day -April 25th


Charles Dodgson did not love 'Children' He loved lots of little girls, especially Alice Liddell. He was obsessed with her. He spent every moment that he could with her. Up until suddenly in June 1863, their friendship ended after an unexplained rift with Alice's Mother. He also took many images of nude girls (Not boys) Some which were posed seductively, unlike the images of other Victorian photographers like Julia Cameron, who used nude children. But they were not erotically posed like Dodgson's photographs. Around this same time, he suddenly gave up his love of photography after his request to photograph nude children without the presence their parents. The full frontal naked photograph of Alice's sister Lorina was recently discovered in a French museum. The photograph states that it is 'Lorina Liddell by Charles Dodgson' It has been tested and concluded that it is not a fake and a forensic test compared Dodgsons original images of Lorina to that of the nude teenager. They concluded that the facial features are indeed the same girl and that Lorina would of been the same age as the nude girl. 
 He wrote to Gertrude Thomson, an artist who was sketching girlish fairies and nymphs, "I confess I do not admire naked boys in pictures. They always seem... to need clothes, whereas one hardly sees why the lovely forms of girls should ever be covered up."

This image of a photo possibly of Lorina Liddell by Dodgson (Which I have censored) I found on a 'Girl lovers' Chatroom

And here is a close-up of her face



Charles lutwidge Dodgson aka Lewis Carroll with the Liddell family
 "I am fond of children (except boys)," and photographed many pretty little girls -- some languidly stretched out on a bed, some nude". Charles Dodgson.
*(I was unable to find any photographs of 'nude boys')

 Evelyn Hatch- by Charles Dodgson.

Charles Dodgson and some of the little girls that he photographed.









Dodgson had been groomed for the ordained ministry in the Anglican Church from a very early age and was expected, as a condition of his residency at Christ Church, to take holy orders within four years of obtaining his master's degree. However, he evidently became reluctant to do this. He delayed the process for some time but eventually took deacon's orders 22 December 22, 1861. But when the time came a year later to progress to priestly orders, Dodgson appealed to the dean for permission not to proceed. This was against college rules, and initially Dean Liddell told him he would have to consult the college ruling body, which would almost undoubtedly have resulted in his being expelled. However, for unknown reasons, Dean Liddell changed his mind overnight and permitted Dodgson to remain at the college, in defiance of the rules. Uniquely amongst Senior Students of his time Dodgson never became a priest.
There is currently no conclusive evidence about why Dodgson rejected the priesthood. Some have suggested his stammer made him reluctant to take the step, because he was afraid of having to preach. Wilson quotes letters by Dodgson describing difficulty in reading lessons and prayers rather than preaching in his own words. But Dodgson did indeed preach in later life, even though not in priest's orders, so it seems unlikely his impediment was a major factor affecting his choice. Wilson also points out that the then Bishop of Oxford, Samuel Wilberforce, who ordained Dodgson, had strong views against members of the clergy going to the theatre, one of Dodgson's great interests. Others have suggested that he was having serious doubts about the Anglican church. It is known that he was interested in minority forms of Christianity (he was an admirer of FD Maurice) and "alternative" religions (theosophy). Dodgson became deeply troubled by an unexplained sense of sin and guilt at this time (the early 1860s), and frequently expressed the view in his diaries that he was a "vile and worthless" sinner, unworthy of the priesthood, and this sense of sin and unworthiness may well have had an impact on his decision to abandon the priesthood.

In 1945, Florence Becker Lennon advanced the case that Dodgson had had an unhealthy attraction to Alice with Victoria Through the Looking Glass, the first modern critical biography of him. “People have wondered what he did with his love life,” Lennon wrote. “Now it can be told. He loved little girls, but, like Peter Pan, he had no intention of marrying them.” But Alice, she wrote, “was the first and most favoured of his girl friends,” and she speculated about the idea that Dodgson precipitated the rift with the Liddells by proposing “honourable marriage to [Alice] directly or through her parents” in 1863. Alice was 11 then—too young, even by Victorian mores.
Lennon’s basis for the assertion may have seemed sound: Ina was one of her sources. (Alice did not talk to Lennon because, her sister said, she was ill.) But in a letter to Alice, Ina wrote, “I tremble at what I said” to Lennon about the Liddell family’s supposed rift with Dodgson. “I said his manner became too affectionate to you as you grew older and that mother spoke to him about it, and that offended him, so he ceased coming to visit us again.” Ina had also told Lennon that she, Ina, was 10 at the time—but she was 14, or old enough to entertain formal suitors.


Full frontal nude photo of Lorina Liddell found
Lewis Carroll's shifting reputation.






The secret symbols used by paedophiles to identify each other

The secret world of Lewis Carroll-BBC documentary

 
Some examples from paedophile (or as they like to call themselves 'Girl Lovers')
forums,chat rooms and magazines