How often don’t we see headlines that cry out
figures about a gigantic sex trafficking and sex slavery in the world? And they’re always based on “official
reports”. As late as 2012, in the American
governmental “Trafficking In Persons” (TIP) “report”, it is quoted an
“estimate”, made by ILO, that says that about 6.6 million women and girls were
sex trafficked in the world in 2005, and that ILO in the 2012 report has “identified
a higher percentage of sex trafficking victims, than in the 2005 Report”. It sounds scary, doesn’t it? The very big problem is, however, that none
of these figures, or any figure concerning sex trafficking in any UN-,
Interpol-, Europol-, EU-, IOM- or whatsoever “report” has the slightest to do
with science, reliable investigations or different countries’ authentic
statistics around sex trafficking. All
these reports are, without any exception, nothing but
“guesstimates”; or as Jay Albanese, criminologist at Virginia Commonwealth
University, says:
“There’s
tons of estimates on human trafficking.
They’re all crap”.
They have nothing whatsoever to do with reality, but are only results of
false propaganda, produced to serve the purposes of the abolitionistic
agenda.
A very small crime
In reality there are
an absolute maximum of about 3000 known cases of sex trafficking in the
whole world every year, and since about 10-15 years back (when authorities
started to count) they don’t become more or less frequent. It means, that if ILO’s figures should be
accurate the 6.6 million female sex trafficked victims 2005 must have been
entering prostitution during a period of 2200 years, without anyone of them
leaving the profession during their whole, endless lifetime (that is, with a
global population as big as ours all that time). And I really doubt that such old sex workers,
as nearly 2200, or even 1100 years old, are attractive for anyone – regardless
if you believe that people can live for such long time or not, as obviously the
“researchers” at ILO do – not even the most fanatic gerontophile.
But the dark figures
then, you say, don’t they explain the differences? No, because sex trafficking is, beside
terrorism, the most prioritized crime in the world. Only in the US the government alone spends tens
of millions of dollars every year, so a found victim costs about 110,000 $ each
– to compare with a common non-sexual victim that costs about 150 $. In a small country, like Sweden, the
government spends about 2.8 million $ every year, which means that every found
victim, forced or freely, costs about 570,000 $. It doesn’t exist any possibility at all that
there can be any high “dark figures” in sex trafficking. Probably all, or at least the very big
majority of the victims are found, especially as it is common in legalized
environments, that costumers react and call for help for forced women, as most
of the buyers prefer free sex workers.
Even the Swedish BRÅ (Crime preventing counsil) says that there are
probably no dark figures
(BRÅ
rapport 2011:18 s 21).
A fact is also, that
almost all scientific investigations – with exception for those which focus
only on clinical or street populations, as Melissa Farley does to pretend that
all sex workers are forced – show that about 94 % of all sex workers make an
own choice to enter prostitution. Professor Thomas M. Steinfatt at Miami University,
and his Thai crew, found during 12 years of interviews of more than 4000 bar
prostitutes in Thailand
none that claimed to have been forced into prostitution, although about
30 % didn’t enjoy their work. That
leaves very little room for trafficked women.
Australian and New Zeeland investigations have also found, that the
indoor sex worker (at least 80 % of all sex workers in the whole world) has
greater work satisfaction than the average American! And furthermore not lower mental health than
the average woman.
Sex trafficking is not a big criminal activity
Another myth is that sex trafficking is the third
biggest criminal activity in the world.
Among others both Interpol and Europol has stated this, and that
criminal “trafficking-networks” annually earn between 3 and 10 billion
dollars. Professor Ann Jordan, American
University Washington College of Law, tried to
localize the authentic source for the claim and the figure. But it didn’t exist any such source. The claim, and the figure, is nothing but
manipulation. Nothing exists that can
confirm them. In reality sex trafficking
is a very, very small activity, most often involving – when it really occurs –
about 1-3 loosely connected persons, and the “sex traffickers” mostly work as
any businessman does. They want profit
from their invested work and money.
In reality sex trafficking is a “zero
crime” (lesser than one case in 100,000 inhabitants). In the whole world, counting from known sex
trafficking cases in national statistics, it is at maximum an average of
0.048 cases in 100,000 inhabitants.
Comparing some countries we find, that the figure for Sweden, with it’s 0.054 cases in 100,000
inhabitants, is both higher than the world average and higher than Germany (0.051), United
Kingdom (0.039), Cambodia
(0.027), Thailand (0.025), USA (0.024), Australia
and Nepal (0.020), Japan (0.008) and New Zealand (0). So the Swedish government’s claim, that the
Swedish sex-purchase-law has minimized sex trafficking, is nothing but a fraud.
The Swedish fraud
When speaking about fraud one must say,
that in the subject of prostitution the Swedish government is quite good at
it. So for example the so called
“evaluation” of the Swedish sex-purchase-law.
Inside Sweden
it has been heavily criticized for being unscientific and for claiming results
which it doesn’t have any grounds for.
The same opinion is expressed by an Australian
official report, an Italian researcher, Daniela Danna, (2012: Client-only
criminalization in the city of Stockholm.
A local research on the application of the “Swedish model” of prostitution
policy”. In Sexuality Research and Social
Policy Journal,
vol. 9, n 1, pp 80-93) and by the mentioned professor Ann
Jordan, who says: “The reports produced by the Swedish government and
other researchers reveal that the government’s claims of success are not
supported by facts. There is no evidence that fewer men are purchasing sex,
that fewer women are selling sex or that fewer people are being trafficked into
forced prostitution.” But this
doesn’t stop for example the Swedish minister for EU, Birgitta Olsson, to speak
about the success of the Swedish sex-purchase-law, or to quote all
fantasy-figures concerning sex trafficking as facts, and that (sex) trafficking
is the third biggest criminal activity in the world. And, of course, the Swedish government
refuses to comment the critics. It only
keeps on pretending the “evaluation” is reliable.
But Birgitta Olsson isn’t more to blame
than the Swedish medias. All the biggest
papers, and Swedish television, stubbornly refuse to report facts that
contradicts the official view of sex trafficking and slavery. And the so called “debate” editorial staffs
in all the big papers censor debate texts that contradicts the official view of
the gigantic sex trafficking. And an
absolute taboo in Swedish media is to speak about the obvious
opinion-corruption in the subject which occurs in the Swedish journalist
corps. As for example, a Swedish well
known program leader, Robert Aschberg, advertised in public that “all opinions”
were to be heard in his radio show. But
when it came to criticizing the Swedish view of trafficking and prostitution,
and the opinion-corruption in media and among journalists, then the advertise
statement didn’t matter any longer. As a
fact the Swedish journalists, as well-broken dogs, guard the political
correctness, without any care whatsoever about the free spoken word within the
subject of prostitution and sex trafficking.
Why do they lie?
So why do media/journalists,
politicians, NGO’s, radical feminists, abolitionistic and religious activists
so unrestrained use false facts, stop critical voices, exaggerate figures, and
even lie – at the same time as they aggressively accuse critics for being
“embracers of monsters” or supporters of the so called “prostitution lobby”
(which also is pure fantasy)? The answer
is, that within that circle of people lies the only “trafficking industry” that
exists in reality. The subject of sex
trafficking and sex slavery in the sex-condemning western society is a very
profitable subject for the involved for different reasons. For media/journalists it is about selling
single copies, and it portraits them as engaged and compassionate, without them
having to do any work. It’s enough to
repeat what the official view states and, as parrots, uncritically repeat what
the activists and “reports” claim, and then and then hang out some critical
person as an “embracer of monsters”. The
same goes for the politicians. It makes
them look as if they care for “the small” human being, without any need to
engage in her at all. As for
NGO’s they profit economically. In the position to be able to heavy
exaggerate figures they can entice governments and upset people to give them
more money. Or as Steven Wagner, earlier
at United States Department of Health and Humans Services, said about money given to groups
aimed at finding trafficked victims:
“Those funds were wasted. Many of
the organizations that received grants didn’t really have to do anything. They were available to help victims. There weren’t any victims.” As for radical feminists and activists, they
can profit in several ways, but maybe the ideological one is the most
important. By scaring people, falsely
claiming that millions of women and children are suffering sexually in
prostitution, and pretending that the very few worst examples known are
representative for all “victims”, they can force repressive and often male
hostile laws, rules and agendas on the society – and of course get status and
well paid positions for themselves. And
anyone who threats these profits and benefits with real facts must be attacked,
accused and silenced. So much for their
“democratic mind”.
But non of these groups, however,
care for all those people who they hurt from the official politics – and
they’re a lot more than the “victims”.
As for the Swedish sex-purchase-law, “saving” one unwillingly sex worker
make indirectly life hard for at least 18 willingly ones. And in USA, during the period of the most
intensive paedophile witch hunt, in the 90s, it was 267 unconfirmed
cases of accusations to authorities on one confirmed. And most of these 267 falsely accused persons
lost their jobs, faced broken families and got their lives devastated, without
getting any help from the society – or the “good” activists. And – what’s maybe more important – saving
one child victim consequently created as a minimum 267 child victims in
hurt families! So don’t try to fancy me
that we’re talking about good and compassionate people in the prostitution, sex
trafficking or any “rightful” sexually related agenda. Their first and foremost care is about
themselves, their economy, ideas, ideology, faith, status and/or
well-being. Real compassion – as we see
from all the victims they create – has nothing to do with their acting.
An evolutionary adaption
Trading sex is an evolutionary adaption, which
means that it is biologically inherited in most primate species, including
mankind. But this isn’t to say that all
females trade sex for money, but most trade sex in some way; as reward for a service
inside or outside marriage, to get a better position in the career, to get
support, etc, as the testosterone makes the male easy to fool. To eradicate an evolutionary adaption is
impossible. Christianity has tried for
1700 years and failed – and has only succeeded in haunting and terrorizing
people. So even if “the good ones”
should eradicate, for example, every homosexual in the world today there would
be as many in next generation, because it’s biologically inherited. The only thing “righteous” people do, when
trying to “correct” the evolution and outlaw evolutionary adaptions, is, as
sociologist Howard S. Becker tells us, to make criminals out of people who
otherwise don’t show a criminal behaviour.
It’s a way for society to produce unnecessarily criminals – and for self
appointed “good” people to profit from them instead of doing any
productive. And the self appointed
“good” activists also stigmatize and make lives a hell for those they condemn
as “wrong”. The “good” activist and her
allied act today in the same way they did already during the hunt for heretics
and “sodomites” in the Middle-age, the witch-hunts from the 15th to
the 18th century, the masturbation panic during the 18th
and 19th century, etc. The
“good” activist, unfortunately, really seems to never die, and almost always
she/he is in the frontline of the haters.