12-12-2012, 18:31
Don’t let Grant away with completely twisting the facts:
The following information from a sex worker organisation should be of some help:
Most sex workers start in the industry as children
http://www.women.it/cyberarchive/files/melrose.htm is Rhoda’s own source. However Professor Melrose’s research actually states (in this document):
‘The data on which I am drawing in this paper was generated by in-depth interviews with forty-six women, all of whom had become involved in prostitution before they were 18. At the time of the interviews, 32 were still involved in prostitution. Approximately three-quarters of those interviewed were street-working prostitutes.’
So – Prof Melrose only interviewed sex workers who had become involved before age 18. Around 75% were street sex workers.
However, Rhoda extrapolates this into: ‘For example 75% of women in prostitution in the UK became involved when they were children’ (p.6) – which is very different to the reports actual findings and a rather large leap!
Regarding the rape myths about men who purchase sex:
You might find this document useful from our own website – which is an academic challenge to ‘Challenging Men’s Demand’ and specifically critiques the reports assertions about men who purchase sex.
http://scot-pep.org.uk/sites/default/fil...otland.pdf
Page 3 particularly states:
‘misrepresentation and distortion of the report’s own findings. The report found that 22% made associations between sex workers and sexual violence, the majority of men interviewed did not make these links and did not hold the view that sex workers deserve sexual violence’
On trafficking / decriminalisation:
Re Rhoda’s footnote no.49 – Cho et al – she is in fact quite selective in the quotes she uses from the source document as the authors actually qualify their findings and place caveats on their own findings.
She does not include a link to the document itself but you can find it here:
http://www2.lse.ac.uk/geographyAndEnviro...EVISED.pdf
Their caveats include (page 10 under ‘conclusions’)
‘Our central finding, i.e., that countries with legalized prostitution experience a larger reported incidence of trafficking inflows, is therefore best regarded as being based on the most reliable existing data, but needs to be subjected to future scrutiny’
Furthermore, the authors also go on to caution against using their research to argue for criminalisation as that would miss the potential benefits of ‘legalisation’.”
The following information from a sex worker organisation should be of some help:
Most sex workers start in the industry as children
http://www.women.it/cyberarchive/files/melrose.htm is Rhoda’s own source. However Professor Melrose’s research actually states (in this document):
‘The data on which I am drawing in this paper was generated by in-depth interviews with forty-six women, all of whom had become involved in prostitution before they were 18. At the time of the interviews, 32 were still involved in prostitution. Approximately three-quarters of those interviewed were street-working prostitutes.’
So – Prof Melrose only interviewed sex workers who had become involved before age 18. Around 75% were street sex workers.
However, Rhoda extrapolates this into: ‘For example 75% of women in prostitution in the UK became involved when they were children’ (p.6) – which is very different to the reports actual findings and a rather large leap!
Regarding the rape myths about men who purchase sex:
You might find this document useful from our own website – which is an academic challenge to ‘Challenging Men’s Demand’ and specifically critiques the reports assertions about men who purchase sex.
http://scot-pep.org.uk/sites/default/fil...otland.pdf
Page 3 particularly states:
‘misrepresentation and distortion of the report’s own findings. The report found that 22% made associations between sex workers and sexual violence, the majority of men interviewed did not make these links and did not hold the view that sex workers deserve sexual violence’
On trafficking / decriminalisation:
Re Rhoda’s footnote no.49 – Cho et al – she is in fact quite selective in the quotes she uses from the source document as the authors actually qualify their findings and place caveats on their own findings.
She does not include a link to the document itself but you can find it here:
http://www2.lse.ac.uk/geographyAndEnviro...EVISED.pdf
Their caveats include (page 10 under ‘conclusions’)
‘Our central finding, i.e., that countries with legalized prostitution experience a larger reported incidence of trafficking inflows, is therefore best regarded as being based on the most reliable existing data, but needs to be subjected to future scrutiny’
Furthermore, the authors also go on to caution against using their research to argue for criminalisation as that would miss the potential benefits of ‘legalisation’.”
![[-]](https://adultworkforum.com/themes/andreas09-purple/collapse.png)