[aaron695]

Is this a Reddit style conspiracy theory we all know is not true but play along with cause it's fun thing?

I did like the Finland never existed meme for instance, but I don't think it's really a HN thing.

Sex trafficker steals phone to stay off the radar or just a general homeless person steals phone, what's more plausible?

A sex trafficker that can't afford bus fare let alone a car? I feel like you need a car to be a plausible sex trafficker.

Or was that code?

[hiram112]

The 'sex trafficking' angle has become a straw-man for the anti-prostitution crusaders. Does it exist? Of course. But most non-biased studies show that it is not involved in the vast majority of prostitution related transactions. Period.

What's interesting is that the same Girl-Power groups that push the trafficking narrative the loudest, are the exact same ones who will scream that it's 'her body, her choice' for pretty much any other situation including custody, abortion and reproductive rights, etc.

So the solution to the problem is to continue to maintain prostitution's illegality, or at least moral stigma, but just penalize and shame the men, while asserting that the women are just victims.

[Thimothy]

Which non-biased studies are you talking about? It's the first time I've heard this narrative and seriously have trouble thinking about a non sexual-exploitation related cause for human trafficking in the western world.

[Khaine]

Thats not what he said. He said that most prostitution does not use sex trafficked persons. He also said that sex trafficking is a topic used by groups to rail against prostitution. Neither of these points argue against your point that the majority of human trafficking is for sex exploitation.

[Thimothy]

Hum... Where you parsed "most prostitution does not use sex trafficked persons", I understood "prostitution and human traffic do not have much correlation". I will have to agree that your interpretation is more charitable, and probably closer to what the GP meant, but I still want to see those studies.

I couldn't find them in a google search, that is not surprising as is quite a topic, but a quick search brings that there are 40 million people involved in prostitution, and 4.5 million have been victim of sex trafficking. That gives a rough estimate of 1/10 prostitution related transactions directly involved with human trafficking, so the use of "vast majority" is called into question.

I'm just realizing, though, that what really irks me is that the GP is using himself some kind of straw-manning himself. I've never found an prostitution abolitionist that pointed to sex-trafficking as the "big problem" in prostitution. The big problem is always women who are drawn into it involuntary, or more precisely, would very much rather do any other thing in the world. Sex-traffic is not an straw-man, but an global expression of the worst face of prostitution, and some people would say that an incidence of 10% is enough reason for pushing for the complete banning.

The reason I didn't address the second point, or the rest of the comment, is that I'm not really interested in discussing what other people discuss on such a flamewar-baity topic.