First and foremost…what is all this about Seattle?
Where?
Here’s every reference to Seattle that I could find:
Since Lexi is waving around VV’s “lies” about Seattle instead of addressing anything else I said, I’d like to know.
So now I’ve googled and come up with DIFFERENT articles about Seattle and prostitution, including one that’s poppin’ fresh from TODAY:
The headline:
"SPD Says Seattle Weekly Has Their Facts Wrong On Juvenile Prostitution"
The content:
** It should be noted that in 2010, after the department changed the name of the Vice unit to the Vice/High Risk Victim’s Unit and shifted the focus to treating prostitutes as **victims rather than criminals, **the SPD made **81 juvenile recoveries. **To date in 2011, police say they’ve made 24 recoveries.
*
So unless I’m missing something, VV “lied” and supposedly shaved 3 off the 2007 number of 20, 16 from the 2008 number of 30 and 24 off the 2009 number of 40?
And I still can’t figure out where these figures appeared at all.
Yeah, I’m really not seeing anywhere that there’s these rampant numbers of babywhores running around Seattle (or anywhere else) that the VV is lying about.
Pardon me. This has already been done. **WITH THE TRUE NUMBERS FROM THE REAL STUDY THAT YOUR SOURCE COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY LIED ABOUT.
**
You said:
“The starting lowest number for the USA is 16,000 using the data I found.”
The accurate statement would be:
“The starting lowest number for the USA is 16,000 using the TOTAL LIES** I found and I’m now pretending haven’t been shown to be total lies made up out of nowhere and falsely claimed to be gleaned from a 400-plus page study I have never laid eyes on and have still not bothered to look up, even though stoid pointed out that the site I was using was lying.”**
Where did the VV print those numbers at all? Care to link me?
And the VV was wrong by, at most, TWENTY. 20.
YOUR SOURCE was wrong by **MORE THAN A MILLION.
See post #152. you know, the one you are ignoring.
**
"91 at the lowest end and 620 at the highest!!!
That’s using the VV’s 7%. Being a little more aggressive, I think it can be argued that the number is actually 14%. So double all of it, and you are still at less than 200 on the low end and a little more than 1200 at the high end."
…well, I’m sure you are happy to cite the correct number. You might want to learn how this whole debating thing works on the internet by the way.
Your claim: Village Voice lied.
Your claim: Seattle’s number is lower than the Police Department said it was.
This is the lazy debating style I’m talking about. What numbers does the Village Voice talk about in regards to Seattle? I’ve searched the article: I couldn’t find any numbers about Seattle. I found this:
And I found this:
I couldn’t find any numbers that you claim are a lie. If you insist there are lies in the article: show us them. Show us first what the lie is, then show us the truth.
On preview: I note that Stoid has just gone through the same process as me. So Lexi: show us the claim that the Village Voice has made that you can prove is a lie. Don’t make everyone else do the work for you: stop being as lazy as the OP.
I am not anti-sex, I am not a “moral crusader”, in fact I think if police put an effort into eliminating illegal activities such as youth prostitution, and brothels were legal, I would have NO PROBLEM. In fact I’d have a few friends who are still living, and this would be good.
I do not know if the 100,000 to 300,000 number is correct - in fact considering evidence and arguments of RATIONAL posters (meaning those who can see through the transparent bad journalism of the VV article and use other arguments and evidence) - I am willing to consider that my own guess based off local numbers in the midst of a pre-olympics buzz, as well as having only lived and visited in cities that were homeless meccas during my street life is probably unreasonable high, and I am looking at other stats.
The numbers coming up are NOT ~800 for youth prostitution and although I would never venture to even guess how many over 18 women have a choice - the number is non-zero.
As for VV’s lies - Village voice’s numbers are mentioned in this rebuttal:
Just because the numbers are off by smaller amounts doesn’t make them more correct… Or does it?
They were off - and they used arrest numbers in a DIRECT COMPARISON with numbers of AT RISK - this is why I discount the VV’s article.
But I do notice, none of you have any other article… HMMMM…
This is not evidence. This is, at best, an uncited anecdote. It is no better than the rambling drivel you have been posting.
I’m absolutely sure that any youth in the commercial sex industry are lying about their ages: and I’m absolutely sure that they don’t have to be taught or trained to do this. But just posting about it and veryifing this are two different things. There proof of this?
The proof that this is routinely done by police departments all across the United States? Absolutely none.
Well, yeah. Thats because they’ve been arrested for being in possession of weed or committing petty larceny.
The Village Voice is absolutely clear the source of the arrest figures was the SPD. There is a difference between “arrests” and “recovery” they are not the same thing.
In your own words Lexi: what is so compelling about that rebuttal? IMHO, there looks like there is nothing of substance in there whatsoever.
Wait a moment. Even if we settle this debate about underaged prostitution… the OP was about a subset of all underaged prostitutes, namely those who are trafficked. Are there any real numbers for those?
Okay, Stoid I understand, s/he has a relation who is a sex positive sex worker, and Stoid is not wanting all the industry lumped in with the nasty shit, like the child sex trade. I don’t want it lumped in either, women should have the same rights to have sex with whom they want, and for money as they like, as they should have to the fruit of their womb.
As for the Banquet Bear, what is your motivation?
My motivation is this - I had friends, many dead now who you are saying didn’t exist because you choose to believe that there are only 827 kids in the sex trade.
Ashton’s campaign - the topic of the past few days is about exploitation. The topic here got off topic to exact that -exploitation and the number of underage sex workers.
Stop saying that. No one claimed that. 827 is the average annual number of arrests for child prostitution in major American cities.
My motivation has two parts.
To fight ignorance. People shouldn’t think there are 300,000 sex slaves in the United States, because there’s not.
To promote legalization of prostitution. As I previously wrote, I don’t like violent pimps. I’d like to put violent pimps out of business. I think legalizing prostitution would help put a lot of violent pimps out of business. Would it get them all? No. But I think it would significantly help. It would also offer people working as prostitutes more protection against robbery and assault. It would also generate tax income. It would also encourage condom usage and more sanitary conditions during prostitution. Encouraging the false mentality that 1/1000 people in the United States is kept as a commercial sex slave will not help this goal.
I thought you were just a pedant - and I didn’t mind you nor Bricker - you at least don’t cling to the VV’s article as if a secondary source wrote in such an inflammatory manner is the holy grail which proves that OMG - there are no underage prostitutes.
Others including the village voice are framing sentences and arguments to make it look like the number of arrests = the number of sex workers. And as I said before the VV is framing it so they use a direct comparison of arrests versus a number that is supposed to be at risk in North America.
My points are simple:
1.) there is a non-zero number of real sex-slaves.
2.) the child sex trade exists and although the number may not be 800 - and is less than the 100,000 to 300,000 numbers - it exists.
3.) the VV’s article is full of it and trying to make you think the number of kids in the sex trade is ~800
Did anyone accuse you of this? If so, I didn’t see it.
I saw people accusing you of being a lazy debater. I accused you of dodging facts and information that refutes your assertions. I see people busting you on being full of shit. I haven’t noticed anyone accusing you of being a moral crusader or being anti-sex, so I’d say that no, you don’t need to repeatedly defend against accusations that no one’s making.
Rational means agree with you?
Rational means using MADE UP NUMBERS?
Rational means LYING?
Ummm. No. That’s not what rational means.
At least, not among people who are, in fact, rational.
And no one, except YOU, has made the claim that they are.
Allow me to introduce you to our old friend, the Straw Man. You are actually intimately familiar with him, you just may not be aware of his common name.
Now I know you don’t acknowledge much of anything that disagrees with or undermines your position, so I’m guessing you don’t follow many links that are offered. So let me give you this quote about how Mr. Straw Man works:
Yes, you and Straw Man are very intimately acquainted indeed.