For future reference, I'll note the solicitation for comments at the end of an article is sometimes more revealing than the title.
"Why do you think men pay for sex? Do you think more should be done to stop them?"
The author of the article carried out a study based on interviews with Johns, which after reading some of the responses she chose to highlight, leaves one wondering whether a discussion about observer effect would be totally lost on her. But it's not the methods that do my nut in so much as what these people are trying to accomplish. The author and implicated legislators, to me, appear to be MORONS.
They want to fight exploitation and trafficking so they've decided to craft and support a new law to punish men who purchase sex from exploited women, regardless of the John's awareness of the woman's situation. (My cursory supposition is that this 'study' was concocted to refute challenges to the legality of the new law.)
At risk of banality, I'd like to point out that presumably this law will dissuade no-one.
Meanwhile, IT'S THE JOHNS THEMSELVES who are in the best position to be able to gather and relay relevant information to investigators about exploitation and trafficking. The most effective thing they could do is create a morally approved line of communication with legal amnesty. Many of the Johns interviewed in the article seemed to suffer from guilt complexes and would probably be more than grateful for some positive angle in which to frame their activities.
One quote from the article exemplifies the situation:
'One man suspected that an African woman he had met was trafficked because "she was frightened and nervous. She told me she had been tricked. I had sex with her and she seemed fine with the sex. She asked me to help her, but I said there was little I could do. She might have been lying to me."'
Rather than providing an avenue for a guy like this to come forward with helpful information, their new law is going to increase his certitude that it would be an act of self-sacrifice.
It honestly makes me wonder whether the morons apparent, really care about exploitative practises at all, or whether it's all just humbug allowing them to carry out a less popular crusade against prostitution in general.
