Human Trafficking is Largely a Scam

y2k

Sparrow
Simeon_Strangelight said:
...local enriching Muslim...
This is muddying the waters and taking advantage of the unfortunate situation.

You just attack and misrepresent Muslims every chance you get, this thread had nothing to do with Islam. You are spamming lies under a guise.

Would you keep your anti-Islam rhetoric to the "Datasheet on Islam" and other relevant threads please? I will try to answer any sincere legit questions that I can. Maybe other interested members will join you there.
 

Easy_C

Crow
That doesn’t make porn and hookers good things. We still need to take the most effect method possible to minimize their prevalent because the effects of such things are devastating to the health of the society that they exist in.

Based on the evidence so far find the idea that “pornography is a planned subversion” far more likely than the idea that “they’re trying to undermine pornography by claiming it uses trafficking! “is a planned subversion.
 
y2k said:
Simeon_Strangelight said:
...local enriching Muslim...
This is muddying the waters and taking advantage of the unfortunate situation.

You just attack and misrepresent Muslims every chance you get, this thread had nothing to do with Islam. You are spamming lies under a guise.

Would you keep your anti-Islam rhetoric to the "Datasheet on Islam" and other relevant threads please? I will try to answer any sincere legit questions that I can. Maybe other interested members will join you there.
Your solid contributions of 9 posts with relentless Islam and veganism pushing is indeed highly valuable here. I noted it because those are the cases that are found in the West for real if you like it or not. If you saw lots of Buddhists doing it in the West, then I would mention it, but it's not a bloody "unfortunate situation", but the damned reality. It's as if trucks of peace and various terrorist attacks in the WEst are unfortunate accidents.

Aside from that you had a few cases of gypsies getting a few girls captured, but they would flee and the cases were few and far in between. In the US you occasionally have some cartels which exert certainly way more pressure on some girls, likely kidnap them, but even that - that is hardly the broad definition pushed in the media. And in Europe it's mostly Muslims whether you like it or not - aside from the elite whose numbers are not known. In Britain alone it was thousands of underage girls, so no trifling number.

 

Aurini

Ostrich
y2k said:
Simeon_Strangelight said:
...local enriching Muslim...
This is muddying the waters and taking advantage of the unfortunate situation.

You just attack and misrepresent Muslims every chance you get, this thread had nothing to do with Islam. You are spamming lies under a guise.

Would you keep your anti-Islam rhetoric to the "Datasheet on Islam" and other relevant threads please? I will try to answer any sincere legit questions that I can. Maybe other interested members will join you there.
Ok, Boomer.
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
MajorStyles said:
Aurini said:
We're supposed to feel bad because watching Pornhub videos may involve exploitation.
THIS.

Heartiste used to say, "Feminism is about limiting a man's sexual options while simoultaneously expanding a woman's options" (or something to that effect). Your analysis is good example of the feminist mindset at work.

Closing down massage parlors, stigmatizing porn sites...both of these limit a man's sexual options (done under the guise of eliminating human trafficking).
...
You know, I honestly think that this behavior has a far darker side than merely tipping the sexual scales in their favor.

The premise that women are simply seeking a more favorable sexual market falls flat when you realise that they really exhibit no desire to lock up the traffickers and the rapists. I don't think women really care that weak men have sex with hookers rather than being forced to invest greater resources in the dating market instead. They are simply disgusted by the idea of weak men having sex at all.

I used to think Heartiste's ditty there was infallible but I've come to realise it doesn't actually capture the primal desires in play. The whole "feminism is a trade union for ugly women" thing is cute but it has little basis in provable reality.

As I said. They really exhibit no desire to lock up the traffickers and the rapists. They'd rather persecute beta males because any excuse is good enough, and as an added bonus it draws attention away from the rapists and traffickers which have the psychopathic natures that act like catnip to the female lizard-brain natural selection coding.

In short, if they could lock up all the betas and then compete solely for the attention of the rapists and the traffickers then that's what their ovaries would reduce them to, and dating apps have revealed that when released from traditional patriarchal constraints that they are more than happy to share the attention of a psychopath with a dozen other women as long as their monthly fertility window is attended to. This is why so many game teachers are merely going through the steps of teaching men to pretend how to display psychopathic sociology. We've been seeing this with the "migrants welcome" crap from European women who seem to be bizarrely blind the enormous increase in migrant rapes. Gee, could it possible be that because on a subconscious biological level they see that as a feature, not a bug?

tldr Persecuting betas is not a misguided strategy for preventing sex crime. It's female breeding imperative in action. Just like it is to give psychopaths a pass on even heinous crimes or at least collect their sperm through the jail-bars ("they're not really bad, they just need my ovum love")

Our predecessors knew all of this inherently. That's why they didn't hesitate to put psychopaths and sociopaths down like dangerous animals. This kind of female behavior long predates feminism.

We all know what kind of a cold response we get when we ask rather than when we take.
 

MajorStyles

Kingfisher
Leonard D Neubache said:
The premise that women are simply seeking a more favorable sexual market falls flat when you realise that they really exhibit no desire to lock up the traffickers and the rapists. I don't think women really care that weak men have sex with hookers rather than being forced to invest greater resources in the dating market instead. They are simply disgusted by the idea of weak men having sex at all.
Great point, Leonard. We might be extrapolating too much out of the situation. This could really be a simple case of the sexual marketplace in action. Male orbitors have one purpose for the modern women - to orbit. They can orbit North, South, East, or West...but orbit they must! When this dynamic is broken, then a duplicitous scenario (such as human trafficking) is created in order to bring the orbitor back into his mandated position.

Women are not honest enough to say, "I need you to remain an obedient relief pitcher, ready to be called in from the bullpen when I deem necessary." Therefore, they cast themselves as concerned citizens, using the guise of human trafficking to socially control their orbitors.

Women being concerned about other women should immediately raise your suspicion. When a woman says, "I am concerned about woman X," she often means, "I am concerned about men paying attention to woman X instead of me."
 

Rotten

Robin
I hate using the language of the left.

Human Trafficing is a problem, a Huge problem. Human Trafficing by coyotes or by (((NGOs))) is a huge contributor to overall illegal immigration. These trafficers ought to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. No boats means no boat people.

OP seems to be talking about normal stings against prostitution and/or massage parlors that are described as human trafficking after the fact. Girls need not be trafficked under this definition of trafficking, but the language choice is important because it allows sex positive feminists or their sympathizers to stand against prostitution.
 

MajorStyles

Kingfisher
Rotten said:
I hate using the language of the left.

Human Trafficing is a problem, a Huge problem. Human Trafficing by coyotes or by (((NGOs))) is a huge contributor to overall illegal immigration. These trafficers ought to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. No boats means no boat people.
My understanding of human trafficking is that there is a victim involved (thus the criminal aspect of it). However, there does not appear to be a victim in the case of a coyote transferring a person across the US border. One person—the illegal immigrant—willingly desires to be transported across the border, so he/she pays the coyote to assist in the process. The illiegal immigrant is not a victim, nor is he trafficked, since he willingly sought out the transportation.

However, if the illegal immigrant is subjected to something different, then perhaps that could be considered “trafficking”: i.e. he/she is sent to a different location. Perhaps this occurs…I would not know.

The immigrant is “trafficked” in the technical sense, but he is really just transported. If the immigrant is really “trafficked,” then everybody that takes public transportation would be the victim of human trafficking, since the same dynamic is at play: i.e. a willing buyer and seller in the purchase of transportation.
 

Number one bummer

Kingfisher
Gold Member
MajorStyles said:
Rotten said:
I hate using the language of the left.

Human Trafficing is a problem, a Huge problem. Human Trafficing by coyotes or by (((NGOs))) is a huge contributor to overall illegal immigration. These trafficers ought to be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. No boats means no boat people.
My understanding of human trafficking is that there is a victim involved (thus the criminal aspect of it). However, there does not appear to be a victim in the case of a coyote transferring a person across the US border. One person—the illegal immigrant—willingly desires to be transported across the border, so he/she pays the coyote to assist in the process. The illiegal immigrant is not a victim, nor is he trafficked, since he willingly sought out the transportation.

However, if the illegal immigrant is subjected to something different, then perhaps that could be considered “trafficking”: i.e. he/she is sent to a different location. Perhaps this occurs…I would not know.

The immigrant is “trafficked” in the technical sense, but he is really just transported. If the immigrant is really “trafficked,” then everybody that takes public transportation would be the victim of human trafficking, since the same dynamic is at play: i.e. a willing buyer and seller in the purchase of transportation.
Children being recycled to take advantage of the family separation policy is real and a true definition of trafficking. There is also data to support that a lot of trafficked women are sexually assaulted by coyotes but I am more skeptical of those numbers. I would argue that in the case of border traffickers, the average american would be the victim and if the trafficker abused his "clients" that would simply be a more aggravating charge.

As far as domestic trafficking, there is a broad spectrum regarding the seriousness of the act. While the issue might seem overblown when you look at the numbers of true 'sex slave' cases. The number of more ambiguous cases, such as where an addict is stuck in a relationship with a pimp where they have limited free-will, is far more common.

Trafficking is made murkier by the different ways it is framed. The issue can be used to argue for both better border control as well as open borders. It can be used to argue for legalizing prostitution as well as stricter sentencing for traffickers at the same time.

I've always had a moral debate over the legalization of prostitution. Looking at the way trafficking has developed, legalization could create a larger underclass that are simply dependent on the government instead of a pimp. My argument for legalization is that it might correct the sexual market by forcing women to bring more to the table, as well as re-establishing social shame towards gross promiscuity instead of the pity afforded currently.

The way the culture war has progressed in the last decade, I am less inclined to believe legalizing sin is a solution to cultural problems. It's similar to the lolbertarian and cuckservative crowd that align to the right solely for the purposes of liberal drug legalization or marginal tax rates.

In conclusion, trafficking is a social problem but it might be overstated in order to support certain narratives.
 
Top