|
CrazyTolradi posted:Running around in circles is no one's idea of a fun time. They seem to like personal attacks though
|
# ? Nov 30, 2014 16:33 |
|
|
# ? May 25, 2024 15:22 |
|
Gough Suppressant posted:claiming that it isn't prohibition is honestly at best semantic and really dumb Good work reading the post where I said exactly this muyb! lightinwater posted:You have no evidence of my ignorance of either not knowing trafficking or what the Nordic model is. I wasn't really up to date with Australian sex work laws but that hardly matters when discussing the Nordic model vs legalisation. I've explained the drug reference and said it was needless and yet I still get needless personal attacks She does have evidence, she has your posts in this thread. If you're going to repeat your same arguments over and over without addressing the responses you're going to be called an idiot.
|
# ? Nov 30, 2014 16:37 |
|
I have no idea what side of the argument you guys are on now (it's really hard to keep track), but wouldn't the best way to understand how to handle the situation be talking to people who are involved in the sex trade and people who are victims of trafficking?
|
# ? Nov 30, 2014 16:42 |
|
It's pretty easy to keep up with me http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3678014&userid=203757&perpage=40&pagenumber=3 If you'd read and understood the bloody discussion being had you'd realise that 'talking to people who are involved in the sex trade and people who are victims of trafficking' is easier said than done and subject to layers of manipulation. I have no beef admitting that I'm biased against the sex trade and Scarlet Alliance because of what I saw when i was doing outreach five years ago. You never hear the same admission of bias from Scarlet, which by its own admission does not represent trafficked and exploited women, and yet sex work survivors and people who have worked with trafficking survivors and women still at risk who speak out against the normalisation of sex work are always labelled as whorephobes by Scarlet when they offer any public criticism at all.
|
# ? Nov 30, 2014 18:16 |
|
Splode posted:Good work reading the post where I said exactly this muyb! Oh i forgot actually, your ad hoc critique of the nordic Model was addressed in the first link i posted lel quote:6. The Nordic Model doesn’t work / pushes prostitution “underground”. this is the amazing thing that keeps happening in every online convo i have about the nordic model, and it's why i can't reject it. i post this one article, which the author wrote out of frustration at being constantly attacked for having the temerity to be ok with the nordic model, and crickets. if the nordic model is so indefensible, it should be a loving breeze to own the gently caress out of that post. and yet, no one has Fruity Gordo fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Nov 30, 2014 |
# ? Nov 30, 2014 18:32 |
|
Fruity Gordo posted:Oh i forgot actually, your ad hoc critique of the nordic Model was addressed in the first link i posted lel Scandinavians are a nation of socialists and Hitler was a National Socialist. Checkmate.
|
# ? Nov 30, 2014 19:27 |
|
CrazyTolradi posted:I have no idea what side of the argument you guys are on now (it's really hard to keep track), but wouldn't the best way to understand how to handle the situation be talking to people who are involved in the sex trade and people who are victims of trafficking? Why would you talk to actual people when you have the option of playing Lefter Than Thou on internet forums? Are you saying that taking cheap shots at people you disagree with is less pragmatic than actually explaining or discussing the issue at hand? How would taking the time to explain the nuance of a complicated issue to someone with a cursory understanding of it in any way compare to the proven positive effect of being dismissive and smug as gently caress? You're weird. Get help.
|
# ? Nov 30, 2014 22:23 |
|
Fruity, thanks for this discussion, it's been interesting to read.
|
# ? Nov 30, 2014 23:46 |
|
Fruity Gordo posted:Oh i forgot actually, your ad hoc critique of the nordic Model was addressed in the first link i posted lel Yeah you don't get to post links and claim victory. Clearly this issue is not yet decided.
|
# ? Dec 1, 2014 01:57 |
|
I voted for Kathleen Maltzahn because I'm not up to date with the intricacies of the Nordic model and also who the gently caress are these one-issue voters for whom prostitution regulation is the number one priority issue.
|
# ? Dec 1, 2014 11:27 |
|
lightinwater posted:Yeah you don't get to post links and claim victory. Clearly this issue is not yet decided. freebooter posted:I voted for Kathleen Maltzahn because I'm not up to date with the intricacies of the Nordic model and also who the gently caress are these one-issue voters for whom prostitution regulation is the number one priority issue.
|
# ? Dec 1, 2014 11:51 |
|
T-1000 posted:I clicked on the "Clearly" link in the hopes it would be a concise summary/rebuttal like the one Fruity posted, and was disappointed. Is there one that specifically addresses some of the things Fruity Gordo's link says? The BBC story linked from Clearly is mostly about how the law just drives prostitution underground and increases danger and doesn't reduce trafficiking, with little/no evidence to back any of it up. Clearly I didn't put enough thought into which words contained which links, not(a sex workers blog) is probably closest to what you want but aside from issue(a BBC news report) they're all pretty substantial and fair reading
|
# ? Dec 1, 2014 12:01 |
|
T-1000 posted:I clicked on the "Clearly" link in the hopes it would be a concise summary/rebuttal like the one Fruity posted, and was disappointed. Is there one that specifically addresses some of the things Fruity Gordo's link says? The BBC story linked from Clearly is mostly about how the law just drives prostitution underground and increases danger and doesn't reduce trafficiking, with little/no evidence to back any of it up. I was using Twitter to try to get up-to-date info about the count, and it was like 80% people celebrating that "frigid oval office" didn't get in. Which I'm sure is not representative of the electorate at large, it was just weird. Or are there quite a few brothels in Richmond? I thought they were mostly in South Melbourne.
|
# ? Dec 1, 2014 13:24 |
|
|
# ? May 25, 2024 15:22 |
|
lightinwater posted:Clearly I didn't put enough thought into which words contained which links, not(a sex workers blog) is probably closest to what you want but aside from issue(a BBC news report) they're all pretty substantial and fair reading The fact that the issue is not yet decided is beyond doubt - that's why we're having this discussion. The meta-issue that sort of spurred this is that some people don't think it's not-yet decided, they're of the view that the "nordic" model is so bad that anyone who supports it is an anti-sex-worker monster. Hence: freebooter posted:I was using Twitter to try to get up-to-date info about the count, and it was like 80% people celebrating that "frigid oval office" didn't get in. Which I'm sure is not representative of the electorate at large, it was just weird. Or are there quite a few brothels in Richmond? I thought they were mostly in South Melbourne. I think I'll have to bow out at this point, I have a probation incoming to force me to get back to work, thanks everyone for all the info.
|
# ? Dec 1, 2014 14:24 |