As much as I favor recycling as a general principle…
Can I ask you for a source for what you are claiming sailor? As far as I can tell, everything in this thread is based upon nothing more authorative than your statement “I’ve been to Cuba, therefore I am an expert and the only valid opinion is mine”. You’re telling Cubans that they don’t know what the situation is in their own country for Christ’s sake! I’ve been to Canada, but if, say, Matt_Mcl tells me that things in Canada work one way, I’m not going to call him a liar because on my visit I may have seen something that appeared different to me.
As to the statements made by W, you can nit pick the accuracy of the slavery statement, I suppose, although a good arguement could be made that some prostitutes are slaves to the poverty that forces them to sell their bodies, and a government that institutionalizes poverty is thereby “supporting” slavery. The problem here is that the looney left refuses to allow any type of hyperbole or even common analogies to be used by the administration- if any statement is not 100% demonstratably true in every aspect as proven by a team of Nobel winning physisists than it’s an “out and out lie”. I don’t really blame them for this, the tactic is one that was dreamed up by the 'Pubbies during Clinton’s term, but it makes meaningful discussion of most issues impossible. Personally, I don’t find any inconsistancies in the stance that tightening the rules on tourism to Cuba will hurt the sex trade there, if one American who was going to travel there for sex is now unable to, than it’s “helped”, the question is how much difference will it make since the vast majority of the tourist trade in Cuba is from Canada or Europe.
Finally, this notion that Bush is somehow despicable for opposing the sex trade in Cuba but not in other parts of the world is itself extremely revealing about where the person in question is coming from. If your true concern was for the plight of prostitutes and children forced into the sex trade, the question wouldn’t be “Why is Bush opposing it in Cuba?” it would be “Why isn’t he opposing it elsewhere?” The first is a question that frames what I suspect is more important here to the person asking it, mindless Bush bashing.
That wasn’t so much the problem as the following bits of late perestroika era trivia…
Condoms manufactured annually, per Soviet man: 2
Proportion of defective condoms: 1/3
Black market price of Soviet-manufactured condom in fall 1989 (for comparison, the average monthly salary then was about 240 rubles, or at the official tourist exchage rate, $40): 1 ruble
Black market price of Western-manufactured condom: 3-5 rubles
Availability of other contraception:
Withdrawal: nearly ubiquitous
IUDs: a few, but frequently inserted under far less than optimal conditions, leading to high rates of failure and dangerous complications
Diaphragms: nobody there knew what the hell I was talking about when I asked
Abortion: theoretically free, unless you want niceties like anesthesia or sterile instruments, for which bribes were basically universal…the average Soviet woman had an estimated 6-8 abortions in a lifetime
I guess retreading condoms is better than nothing, which was the usual alternative.
Jesus H.! I thought he was joking, like a “re-tread” tire! He was joking, right?
Sadly, I don’t think so.
One of our orientation lectures before leaving for the USSR was all about how you MUST bring lots of condoms, because even if you don’t need them, they make great gifts, and nobody will be embarrassed, really.
Then all 40 of us tromped down the road to the one pharmacy in the small upstate NY town of maybe 100 permanent residents where we were holding orientation (we were staying at a place that was normally used for Christian retreats, BTW), and completely cleaned the place out.
As 40 eager-looking college students and recent grads lined up at the register, boxes of condoms in hand, the pharmacist looked bemused. “What are you guys doing in town?” heasked. “Oh, we’re just here for a couple of days at the Christian retreat center up the road.” The look on his face was priceless.
Yeah, I was joking. But I have see instructions on how to reuse a condom. After washing it out (duh!) you are supposed to dry it well, then put some talcum powder on it and roll it up again for storage.
No, it is not up to me to provide proof of the negative, it is up to those making the assertion to provide proof of their positive assertions. I have been to Cuba and have not seen what president Bush claims. Therefore his affirmations contradict my experience but, of course, I have not been to every single house and building in Cuba and I cannot affirm that it is impossible. I can affirm it goes against my experience plus the experience of other people as well as common sense (read Mtgman’s and other posts in this thread). Now it is up to the other side to provide positive proof but we get no proof. Only affirmations which go against experience and common sense.
I have travelled in Europe. We have plenty of European dopers. When someone says sex tours to Cuba are being sold in Europe and/or Canada that goes against all our experience and it is up to who is making the assertion to support it. It is impossible for me to visit every single travel agency in Europe. If you say something exists you are supposed to prove it. And there is NO proof of any wrong-doing in this department by the Cuban government. None. Zero. Nada. All we have is the affirmation of a well-known liar: president Bush.
No, I am NOT telling Cubans what the situation is in Cuba. We have no posts here from people who live in Cuba. We have no posts here from anyone who has been to Cuba and provides any convincing evidence. None whatsoever. OTOH, we have Mtgman’s and otehr posts which are quite convincing to me. I can find you a few Americans who can affirm President Bush ordered the planes to crash into the WTC or that aliens landed in NM. It is the consistency of an argument that counts, not from where it is made.
That is not a good argument except to the loony Bushistas. The same ones who accept the reasoning that if you smoke pot you are supporting terrorists and if you disagree with president Bush you are supporting terrorists, etc. I am not “nit picking” anything. I am calling a lie a lie. It is a lie.
Your “hyperbole” which is my “lies” has cost the world already a war and many dead. I have had enough of president’s Bush “hyperbole”.
He is despicable for lying and inventing a nonexistent problem in Cuba while ignoring other parts of the world where the problem does seriously exist and he could not care less.
Now, if you want to assert the problem exists in Cuba, it is up to you to provide the proof. Your turn. We’re waiting to see the evidence.
but Sailor, A democratic capitalist Cuba wil be completely free of poverty! Just like the US and every other democracy! Isn’t it obvious?
Perhaps. Although slavery is pretty much defined in terms of a master and a slave, both of which are actual entities, not simply economic situations. Being a slave to a non-entity is a fuzzy area already. Plus, there are still choices available to one oppressed by poverty. They can sell themselves, they can seek work, they can look for handouts, dig through trash bins, etc. A master dictates EXACTLY what their slave does, they don’t offer a range of options. Poverty does not dictate that one become a prostitute.**
Here’s where the arguement really falls apart. First, establish that the Cuban government “instutitionalizes poverty”. Secondly, establish where poverty necessarially leads to prostitution. As Libertarian’s participation earlier clarified there is not a direct causal relationship between poverty and prostituion. Not all poor people become prostitutes nor are all prostitutes poor. Also, note that prostitution is not a crime in Cuba. Cuba’s government has made the decision, along with other nations who have decriminalized prostitution, that while certain forms of sex services are undesirable(pimps, brothels, most forms of third-party prostitution), that there is nothing wrong with two individuals, acting on their own, engaging in consensual adult sex for money. Poverty driving someone to do something they have every right to do as a legitimate line of work is a problem how?
The problem is child prostitution and the trafficking of minors/women. So now you’ve got to come up with a way to establish that poverty forces people to sell their children’s bodies in the majority of cases. Then you’ve got to prove the government forces the people to be poor despite other options being available.**
Inconsistencies? No. Naievete? Yes.
It would have a very minor effect even on US-based sex tourists. Sex tourists routinely fly lower on the radar than regular tourists. Sex tourists from the US already know that all you have to do is politely ask the Cuban authorities not to stamp your passport. Sex tourists from the US already travel to Cuba by way of a third party country, Mexico, Canada, etc. Cheap flight to somewhere in Canada, the Carribean, or Mexico, then pay cash for a ticket to Cuba. No paper trail necessary if you take a smaller carrier, heck you can take a boat from Mexico or some Carribean destinations. The US authorities will never have any proof you went to Cuba. I’d hazard a guess that most US-based sex tourists use these means already. Extremely common advice to anyone who does even the most basic peliminary research before starting their trip. In fact, one of the reasons Cuba is such a big stop on the sex tourism circuit is because they are so accessible. Lots of flights to Cuba, boats, etc. make the trip very easy to plan. Not nearly as difficult as arranging a trip deep into Russia, even if there are lots of low-cost providers deep in the old USSR.
Nope, about the only thing that would have an impact on the sex tourist trade is either Cuba making consensual adult prostitution illegal or raising the GDP of Cuba to the point where it is no longer attractive as a low-priced venue. Neither of these would completely stop it, but both would retard it significantly. If the government re-criminalizes it but the price remains low enough, sex tourism will simply be driven further underground. If the price rises, there will still be people who want to come for the exotic nature of the providers and for the other benefits(cigars, beaches, historical value, etc).
The proposed restrictions would hurt people who just want to travel to Cuba for the historical value or as a culture study. IIRC one of our own recently took a covert trip to Cuba. I seem to recall a thread in MPSIMS about it. They weren’t happy about breaking the law, but they had some family ties to the island IIRC and had wanted to go there for quite some time. New restrictions would cause this person to abandon their plans perhaps, but they weren’t part of the problem to begin with.
At absolute MOST, the new restrictions will irritate sex tourists. And as always, the market will provide. Leaning on the port authorities to track US citizens trying to travel to Cuba from nearby Carribean destinations will simply lead to an increase in dedicated flights by private island-hoppers. Hop over from Jamacia or the Dominican Republic on a private plane from a local airport, hell take a boat. The cost won’t go up that much quite frankly. With more embargos on the potential income in the island, prices for sex services may even drop a bit as the inflows of money to the island fall. In a sex tourists eyes all this does is help offset any additional burden the travel restrictions impose.
Nope, Bush’s plans will not have much impact on the sex tourism market. It is a market situation. It needs a market solution.
Just a second, let’s be doubly careful with our pronouns here. We need to be explicit when we are talking about what problems Cuba does and does not have. Cuba DOES have a problem, to some degree, with trafficking of women/children and child prostitution. The problem with Bush’s assertion is that it implicates the government as complicit in these activities(well, that and the naieve idea that his proposals will have an effect on the trade). This accusation of complicity is unproven and unsupported as far as I have seen. As far as I can tell it is very much the opposite. Cuba is fighting against a very strong market force and they don’t have the resources to mount a market-based solution. The Cuban government is, in fact, enforcing their laws against sex with minors. Their laws against this type of behavior are fairly strong, not out of proportion with the rest of the world in either direction as far as I know.
I don’t have first-hand knowledge of the trafficking or underage prostitution communities like I do about the consensual adult prostitution community, but the problem, to some degree, does exist. There is enough overlap in the communities that occasionally someone will put forth a report which says something like “One night I was approached by some guy in a beachfront bar. He said he had seen me with many beautiful young women and he thought I may be interested in his sister. He then pointed out a girl who looked to be about fourteen. I politely told him I wasn’t interested in girls that young and walked away. Kind of gave me the willies. Keep an eye out for those kind of situations.” Gives me the willies too, but it is evidence that these things ARE happening on the island. The problems are the attribution of causality, accusations of complicity, and naieve ideas of what will help fix the problem. The problem itself exists, although Cuba’s troubles with it are not as severe as some other areas.
Enjoy,
Steven
:smack: See, get up on my high-horse and as soon as I do… That last sentence should read.
“The problem of prostitution of minors and trafficking of women/children exists, although Cuba’s troubles with it are not as severe as some other areas.”
Enjoy,
Steven
Mtgman, I am not saying child sexual abuse is inexistent in Cuba just like it is not inexistent anywhere in the world, not even in the USA. Obviously, due to poverty, the problem would be more serious in Cuba. But president Bush has directly accused the Cuban government in directly being responsible for “prostitution slavery”, whatever the hell that is. You and I agree that this is nonsense.
Not a single credible piece of evidence has been presented in this thread which would indicate that the Cuban government is forcing women against their will into prostitution or that they are allowing or condoning child sexual abuse. None.
I have seen some TV documentaries dealing with prostitution and sexual abuse of minors around the world and this never came up. For some reason I have a vague impression these documentaries were mostly French. I have seen them working with NGOs which expose these things and the Cuban government was not mentioned once. They showed what prostitution is like in quite a few countries In Asia and the Pacific rim. With hidden cameras they show the pitiful conditions in which adult and minor prostitutes work. They show how NGOs will secretly film foreigners who use minors and will them take the evidence to the authorities for prosecution. They show how the Government of Burma looks the other way regarding terrible abuses. They show how minors are prostitited in countless countries in Asia and Central America. The situation is Cuba is not the worst by any means. And accusing the government of condoning sexual abuse of minors is, as far as I can gather, a lie.
Now, if someone has credible evidence, I’d like to see it. And I’d like to know why these NGOs and these investigative TV reports are missing it. The word of president Bush is not credible evidence. Much less when it is just vague wording which carries any meaning you wish tyo give it or none at all. It is the same smear tactic he used with Iraq. Soon we will be hearing Castro had a “Child prostitution program” where there were no children involved but it may be conjectured that a guy who worked only three blocks away from a place where castro once slept, was once acused of molesting a boy. that is the kind of proof president Bush uses.
Well when you are accusing someone of SLAVERY and not POVERTY you better make sure your not using “hyperbole” !! Bush has been playing around with words too much and has 60% of America thinking that Saddam was involved in 9/11 even thou he wasnt… so I say no cutting slack for bullshit.
Slavery and poverty arent close to one another in meaning EVER either… so if you take “slavery” to be an open end criticism to Cuban poverty its your choice.
The State Department report that sparked Bush’s comments (the Third Annual Trafficing in Persons Report) doesn’t just single out Cuba, though. Cuba is just one of fifteen countries put on “Tier 3” (Those countries not in full compliance with the minimum standards defined in the Trafficing Victims Protection Act and making no effort to meet those standards). BTW, the other countries are Belize, Bosnia, Burma, the Dominican Republic, Georgia, Greece, Haiti, Kazakhstan, Liberia, N. Korea, Sudan, Suriname, Turkey, and Uzbekistan.
You can read the report here.
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/21555.pdf
As the report puts it:
So, more generally, if you have a problem with the assertion that Cuba tolerates child prostitution, take it up with the State Department, not Bush.
Indeed. I just felt that particular difference, the difference between Bush’s assertions about government complicity versus the existance of the issues they are accused of being complicit in, needed to be highlighted. I think it was this exchange which got me thinking that.
This exchange made it kind of murky as to exactly what the subject of the arguement was. The arguement isn’t about the sex trade in general, or Cuba’s involvement in it. The arguement isn’t even really about the child sex trade and the trafficking of women/children(which, as noted, happens in every country to some degree). The thread is about the alleged complicity of the Cuban government in the prostitution and trafficking of minors/women. Using the words yourself and Weirddave were using seemed to lose this distinction. I just felt we were getting a bit loose with the subject and starting to bleed over into questions about the sex trade in general. Last time we got sloppy we ended up almost debating about forced farm labor(which I decry by the way). Just wanted to keep everything focused. This is about examining the allegations of the President about the Cuban government’s complicity in the child sex trade/trafficking of women/minors.
Enjoy,
Steven
But Bush chose to single out Cuba and that is the news I read. Why is he not threatening Turkey or Greece with the same measures?
But, yes, you are right, I would demand the same evidence from the State Department as they are part of the US government and are an interested party. The wording is kind of vague, only blaming the Cuban government very indirectly. It’s the kind of thing which can mean anything you want it to.
When corrupt DC cops were selling drugs and murdering people you could have said that “American authorities are involved in the distribution of drugs and in the crime that goes with it”. While technically true it would be a very unfair description of America and its government.
I would be much more convinced if the accusations, instead of coming directly from the US government and without support came from independent, unbiased, independent, organizations and they were accompanied by specific data supporting it.
Again, I have no sympathy for the Cuban government. I think it is an unmitigated disaster and has no redeeming qualities. It is an abomination of the worst kind. It is a disaster economically and it is immoral in the way it represses personal freedom. No question about those points but all that does not mean they also engage in child abuse and goat felching. No need to exagerate the evil there is and try to make it look worse than it already is.
By the same token the USA is a model country which stands for freedom and the respect of human rights but it is very far from perfect and Amnesty International have a lot to say about the abridgement of human rights by the US government. I am not goint to take the word of the Cuban government when it comes to judging the USA but neither am I going to take the word of the US government when judging Cuba. they are both extremely biased when it comes to judging each other.
Whether the Cuban government is worthy of censure or not, we should not lose sight of the reasons behind Bush’s renewed assault against that government now. There are only two explanations that make any sense at all.
First, he’s trying to shore up his electoral base in Florida, to make sure the vote isn’t as close in 2004 as it was in 2000. Second, he’s trying to divert attention away from his foreign policy failures in Afghanistan (liberate, then essentially abandon), Iraq (invade on a pretense, then make a hash of it, pissing off most of our allies in the war on terror in the process), and Israel/Palestine (trumpet a “roadmap” that never had a prayer, and do sod all when the car veers off the road).
Please don’t try to tell me that he really, really cares about the plight of the Cuban people, and that’s why he’s launching this initiative now. Is there anyone who actually believes this? IS there no limit to naivete?
And oh, what an brilliant assault it is! Let’s take the policies that have failed for the past 40+ years, and redouble our misguided efforts.
Captian Amazing. I love that report. It is very interesting. First, for anyone who doesn’t know about it, this is a report based on a US law. Basically they set a bunch of standards in the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (Division A of Public Law 106-386, or the “Act”). Every year they evaluate other countries up against this standard and see if they measure up. Those that don’t may lose trade favors or face other sanctions from the US. What is the problem with such a practice? Well, absolutely nothing. They are fully within their rights to say Cuba doesn’t live up to their standards and that trade will be sanctioned accordingly. However, without examining the standards Cuba was measured against and the data used, taking the conclusions this report makes as fact is kind of silly. Also it should be noted that language such as “they are not attempting to meet the minimums required by this act” is misleading because they are not bound by it in the least. This was not a UN treaty, nor was the Cuban government a signatory on it. If the Cuban government chooses a different set of minimums and works towards those, then it is up to a thinking individual to examine those minimums and see if they are reasonable and if the Cuban government is making a good faith effort to meet them. It is not typically a good idea to let a third party say “they’re not living up to our standards” and accept that as evidence of wrongdoing on the part of the accused. Perhaps the third party’s standards were unreasonable or their evaluation flawed in some way. Evaluate Cuba’s standard. See if it is reasonable. Evaluate Cuba’s efforts to achieve their self-stated standards. Not really fair to hold them to standards they never agreed to. Some minimum, yes, but not necessarially the US’s minimum.
Firstly, the Act defines the age of consent as 18. Prostitution by people under 18 would be considered an act of child prostitution. Cuba’s age of consent is 16. So the difference between the two countries age of consent rules already puts Cuba at a disadvantage as far as the report goes, but an age of 16 for the age of consent is actually quite common. On the site I citee above you can find quite a few US states with an age of consent set at 16.
Now, on to the criteria. On page 16 of the report
Well, there’s a lot of subjectives in there and this report seems to be very high-level. At the very least I don’t feel the US is really capable of dealing with Cuba fairly on criteria number 4. The two countries are as near as possible to openly hostile to each other. Why should they co-operate with the US on this issue?
Now, the report is a joint report, covering both issues of Trafficking and forced labor/child labor. Cuba uses forced labor of criminals in various capacities(as the report notes) as well as forced labor of children in agriculture. The divide here is clear and should not be mixed with the issues of child prostitution and trafficking. Cuba makes no attempts to live up to the forced labor provisions of this act because they believe it is not inappropriate. I disagree with forced child labor, and I rank the Cuban government down on that point, but I don’t really have a problem with forced labor on the part of convicts.(the fairness of convictions and political crimes which can land one in a labor camp in Cuba is a different issue and should have a different thread)
Now, as to the info they cite on why Cuba is in the Tier 3? Well, we’ve obviously seen that they were ranked down because their prostitution numbers are inflated due to differences in age of consent and the forced labor issue. The portion of the Cuba section of the report which deals with sex crimes with minors and trafficking of minors(page 54) has this to say.
That isn’t very impressive. No data, they decided to legalize prostitution, no data on traffickers activity or prosecutions. So what exactly can this report offer to the subject at hand? Cuban governmental complicity in prostitution of minors(under 16, not fair to make them conform to our definition of ‘minor’) and trafficking of minors/women? No data, but condemnations based on standards the Cuban govt never agreed to even try to hold themselves to?
Neat report, nice to see they’re at least looking around, but without more actual data it is hard to understand why they made the decisions they made. The strongest condemnation in that report is “Despite occasional measures by the Government of Cuba to crack down on prostitution, state-controlled tourism establishments and independent operators facilitate and even encourage the sexual exploitation of minors by foreign tourists. Government authorities turn a blind eye to this exploitation because such activity helps to win hard currency for state-run enterprises.” I dispute the involvement of state-controlled tourism establishments. As I said earlier, sex tourists, especially those looking for minors, steer way clear of the authorities. I think the report misses this mark for one major reason. The state owns everything! Some overlap between the infrastructure the private operators use to commit prostitution of minors is almost certainly going to exist. Crimes are being committed with state infrastructure because the freaking state owns EVERYTHING. That doesn’t mean the state is complicit in those crimes.
Enjoy,
Steven
Actually, that last bit should say that I dispute the involvement of state-controlled tourism establishments in exploitation of minors or trafficking of persons as an expression of governmental policy. Again, the state owns everything. Everyone is a government employee. That’s just how communism works. Obviously some of these people will be complicit in these acts and some of this infrastructure will be used to commit them. That doesn’t mean they were acting on orders from higher-ups. Acting on orders from higher-ups is what should be proven to start talking about “the regime” and sanctions aimed at punishing “the government of Cuba” as the President’s remarks did.
Enjoy,
Steven
Vey good analysis Mtgman. thanks.
I have another, very serious, problem with the whole “trafficking” thing. When you hear the accusation you imagine transporting people against their will and enslving them. In fact, if you aid people in trying to escape from Cuba you are “traficking” which I find quite ridiculous. Helping people gain their freedom is “traficking”? But the USA defines it that way because they want to keep illegal immigrants out so helping them into the USA is considered “trafficking”. The problem is that the same USA encourages “trafficking” from Cuba by granting permission to stay in the USA to Cubans who get there. So, they accuse the Cuban government of not doing enough while they encourage Cubans to do it. “Trafficking” is encouraged by the USA, not by Cuba.
The whole thing about trafficking is a murky issue. The state department deserves some credit for trying to examine it, but I think their hands are tied by the legislation being overly broad. For instance, they define “trafficking”(page 13 of the linked report) as
Now, let me set up a scenario and we’ll see if we can figure out where it would fall. This is actually a fairly common scenario in Cuba. The link is very informative as well by the way. In fact, I’d suggest it as required reading for anyone who is interested in Cuba’s Sex Tourism issue. The site is blocked by many filtering systems, but contains no nudity or obscenity(in fact they have filed a lawsuit against the blocking company) although they do have somewhat suggestive banner ads.
Anyway, all that aside, back to our story. A girl turns 16. The legal age of consent for sexual activity in Cuba. She decides to move away from the family farm to pursue the more lucrative opportunities in the sex trade. Whatever an individual may feel about this decision, or the sad realities which make being a prostitute a more attractive career than being a farmer, the decision is hers to make in the legal and moral framework of her country.
The sex trade is mainly centered around the major cities in Cuba. So she has to move. Here is where the communist rules of the state starts to become a problem for our heroine and where the first tendrils of the Cuban government’s interaction with the sex trade(and trafficking) begins. Housing is doled out in the major cities only to registered residents. People who are supposed to be living there. This is an artifact of the communist government. Someone working as a freelance prostitute(as they have to because the government doesn’t employ people as prostitutes) doesn’t have a job in the city and therefore is not entitled to housing in the city. So what do they do? They turn to slum lords to get housing close to or in the city. These slum lords probably know the ladies are working as prostitutes and that they are desperate. So they charge them by the day and allow the prostitute to use the house as a base of operations to bring tourists back to(since they often can’t use the tourist’s hotel room thanks to the ban on bringing natives back to a resort). They charge the renter(our prostitute heroine) a higher rate than the market would normally allow for such a house because they know she will have a hard cash income.
So, at the end of our story, we’ve got a woman who moved to the city and is working in the sex trade to support a housing situation she could not have otherwise. The landlord is charging her a rate he knows she probably could not afford if she were not prostituting herself. Where does this fall on the report’s guidelines? Let’s start with a deeper look into the legislation the report is based on and it’s definitions.
Well, the landlord is recieving more money from his property than he normally would, so he’s effectively getting a cut of the prostitute’s taking. He is also “harboring” her in his property and has a pretty good idea of how she earns her money(after all, she probably uses his property as a destination). She traveled to reach her current situation, so she moved from one location to another, where she is now engaged in the sex trade. So was she trafficked? I don’t think so, but the definitions in the act seem to fit the situation. If she stops turning tricks then she loses the ability to pay her inflated rent and the landlord boots her. That seems to fit another definition in the report. The one for coercion.
So where does this situation fall? And where is the government’s involvement? Is the government responsible for this situation because they don’t recognize prostitution as legitimate work and grant prostitutes housing in the city like they do other city-based workers? Is the government at fault because they don’t stop homeowners from subletting their property to prostitutes? Is the government at fault because they don’t regulate the rates the homeowners can sublet their property at and thereby remove the incentive for homeowners to overcharge prostitutes(leading them to continue in the sex trade as about the only viable means of continuing to pay the inflated rent)? Where is Castro’s hand in all this? Would it all vanish if Castro’s regime were removed? Why, or why not?
It is an ugly situation all around, but it is a market situation. The market for sex services exists in the city. Providers come to the city. This increases the market for non-governmental housing which drives the kind of exploitation our heroine is experiencing at the hands of her landlord. Shitty situation all around, but how is a government supposed to stop it? If it recognizes prostitution as a legimitate trade(and granting prostitutes city-based housing as other legitimate workers are entitled to in the communist system) then they’re screwed because they they really ARE supporting prostitution. On the other hand, there is no possible way they can stop people subletting, often in secret, spare rooms in their homes or other property to prostitutes.
I still maintain that this is a market problem and there is virtually nothing the Cuban government can do in a regulatory sense which will stop it. I still ask for people to show where they are encouraging it.
Enjoy,
Steven
Oh, and the whole trafficking thing is even murkier because the Cuban government pretty much gives the US the finger when it comes to things like sharing crime statistics and such. This means the state department has to work off of second-hand reports and their own intelligence. When dealing with something as low on the radar as furtive transactions between sex tourists and under-the-table agreements with landlords and prostitutes, I can’t honestly say I have much confidence in the state department’s ability to accurately make a judgement. This is something that it takes serious info to be able to make definitive statements about and without the co-operation of the Cuban government, I just don’t see a way for them to really understand the problem or its scope and the effectiveness of programs to eliminate it.
Anyway, despite the lack of transparency, some things are well-known and some level of evaluation can be done on that. I wouldn’t consider it conclusive enough to base foreign policy on, but Bush may. The report describes Cuba as having “internal trafficking” for sex and labor. The situation I described above could be considered internal trafficking for sex. Cuba also trafficks minors for farm work(as noted by Bayonet1976) and trafficks criminals for work of various types. Cuba is not in tier 3 just because of their sex-related issues or underage-related issues, although undoubtely they took a large hit in both the “they do it” and the “they aren’t trying to stop doing it” category because of the agricultural forced labor of minors. While I find this practice reprehensible, I can’t bring myself to conflate this issue(which is practiced with government approval/participation) with trafficking for sex purposes(which, I believe, does NOT involve government approval/participation).
Enjoy,
Steven