Regardless of some opinions shared in the article, this effort IS successfully helping many people get out of sex trafficking and prostitution. Why isn't that being congratulated? Wouldn't the trafficking survivor in the article have appreciated a lifeline to safety or housing when she was being exploited and abused? "Unless you're going to offer me an alternative to sex work so I can pay my bills, I'm not interested" - that is literally what is being offered.

At the same time, the chat bot is disrupting (or at least delaying) thousands of men willing to buy sex from minors and other trafficking victims. Again, why wouldn't someone support efforts to stop the men who are paying for sex with trafficking victims?

It's a crazy world when effective programs to help victims and prevent violence need a "counterpoint" just to fit the politics of the Stranger.

Pretty good article about the efforts in our city to combat human trafficking. I am confused by the pro sex work aspect of the article though...trafficking victims are not sex workers, it's a totally separate issue and I think that some lines were blurred in the article.
But all in all, it's great to know that there are organizations out there that are making progress and coming up with new ideas to help those being exploited.

Whenever people point out that there are statistics for more people being trafficked in countries with decriminalization, why do they fail to point out that that is because THOSE SURVIVORS CAN COME FORWARD TO REPORT IT? Duh. Of course you see more of them, because they don't fear as much violence from police, from stigma, etc. if they come forward. This doesn't mean there IS more, just that they have more opportunity to bring it to the public's attention. Tired of half the picture being trotted out as proof that decriminalization comes at the cost of additional exploitation.

The cognitive dissonance in SAS's response is disheartening. Did he not read the part where Ms. LeMoon lost her job because of the criminalization of her past? And, how it was used against her? She has written many items, she's a tremendous writer, too.

Mr. Beiser said that the Men's Accountability Class is run by former sex workers. It's not run by former sex workers at all and in fact they are excluded from the curriculum altogether (The reason given is that a form sex worker saw a form client which caused her to be violently ill). Nonetheless, it's heavy on polemics and barely touches upon sex work except for a poem written in 1992 where the sex worker describes her fears as being "psychos and cops."

Mr. Beiser did stand by Gov. Inslee's desk when he signed a law giving victims of 1st degree trafficking victims an opportunity to clear their record. He should be applauded for that effort toward decriminalization. The issue is that he told the press he wasn't sure how many victims could benefit from this legislation. The truth is he knew at the time the answer was zero. Zero trafficking arrests in 2016 or 2015 of this nature. There were four arrests for minor-labor trafficking but Mr. Beiser was posing for pictures with a TV personality when migrant farm workers were striking for better working conditions. Maybe he's unaware of their circumstances.

Thank you to The Stranger for what I believe is a rarity; a piece on sex work in King County not dominated by the Rescue Industry and kind enough to include the voices of those most impacted...actual sex workers.

@3, the 2012 study is often used by the Rescue Industry but if you read past the abstract you see:
- However, such a line of argumentation overlooks potential benefits that the legalization of prostitution might have on those employed in the industry. Working conditions could be substantially improved for prostitutes – at least those legally employed – if prostitution is legalized.

- Our central finding, i.e., that countries with legalized prostitution experience a larger reported incidence of trafficking inflows, is therefore best regarded as being based on the most reliable existing data, but needs to be subjected to future scrutiny. More research in this area is definitely warranted, but it will require the collection of more reliable data to establish firmer conclusions.

- The problem here lies in the clandestine nature of both the prostitution and trafficking markets, making it difficult, perhaps impossible, to find hard evidence establishing this relationship.

This study that is relied upon often to support the goals of orgs in the Rescue Industry says that the black market nature of underground economies makes it almost impossible to attain reliable data. The only thing they were certain about is that decriminalized environments offer better working conditions.

Mr. Beiser is attributed this quote: "...there are thousands and thousands of aboriginal people and children being exploited, and thousands of immigrants brought to New Zealand and sold to white people."

I've scanned the most recent TIP report multiple times and there is no reference to aboriginal people. It might be an incorrect citation. I couldn't find reference to "immigrants...sold to white people" either. I did find this quote:

"Some migrant workers are forced to work in job conditions different from those promised during recruitment but do not file complaints due to fear of losing their temporary visas. Foreign men aboard foreign-flagged fishing vessels in New Zealand waters are vulnerable to forced labor. Foreign women from Asia are at risk of sex trafficking."

I also read that New Zealand has always been a Tier I level country which is the highest standard for meeting the TVPA.

Maybe I am wrong to believe that there exists at best a high-degree of error of fact within that quote.

Upside: Why are you so invested in johns having the freedom to exploit women for sex? My position is that prostituted women should be free from criminal charges. Your position is that prostitution is A-OK all around. Therefore, the difference between my position and your position is that I think men who buy sex are exploiters, while you think men who buy sex are super great. How do you defend this position?

@7 - I lend women the attributes of agency and abilities to make their own choices, I also listen to sex workers.

Ms. Herzog included in her article Ms. LeMoon's quotes about "exploitation" and "poverty" but you failed to read them and then attribute false words to my comments.

When you start the discussion about Universal Basic Income, when you include the topic of Universal Basic Health, when you consider the issue of poverty, please let me know. Otherwise you are virtue signaling and just another morally bankrupt oppressor.

We've legalized pot but still prosecute consenting adults who exchange money for sex. I don't know if anyone's been paying attention for the last 10,000 years, but prostitution WILL happen. Let's stop the insanity and make it safe, regulated, and taxable.

Underage prostitution, trafficking are crimes. Unfortunately they do exist yet are not the sum up of the sex industry, and will be much easier to detect and prosecute under legalization enforcement guidelines.

Legalization should include the following:
- Certified, regularly inspected establishments that also provide safety for employees and clients alike.
- Employees screened carefully, have right to unionize, 24/7 help hotline, health coverage, social service, etc.
- All clients ID’d upon entry.
- Taxes go to state/county/municipality

@7 How do you defend the position that treating adult women like children and denying them agency is in any way 'feminist'?

@8 and @11: Stating that a person is exploited isn't "denying" their "agency." It's just observing a material fact.

@13 Curious argument. Stating a person is 'exploited' is insinuating that they are not in control of their own decisions, or are not sufficiently responsible to be making their own decisions, so yes that is pretty obviously denying them agency, and pretty obviously an opinion, not a fact. Also, asserting that when you have consenting adults engaging in a transaction and one of them, the female one of course, is 'exploited', you are reinforcing double standards and traditional (anti-feminist) gender roles. Let's just be clear: nothing feminist about this position.

In every article that SWOPUSA members comment where decriminalization of consensual sex work is mentioned- they NEVER mention the sex worker led lawsuit attempting to decriminalize sex work. It’s so glaringly obvious after so many articles that they are purposely counter organizing which works against the effort. What is SWOPUSA doing to establish decrim? NOTHING. So you’d think they would IN THE VERY LEAST show solidarity and signal boost any and every action regardless of what org is involved. Solidarity and decrim are just talking points to these people!! They are working for the opposition by doing that.

The sex worker led case attempting to decriminalize consensual sex work needs support in the way of signal boosting as well as funding. For info on the case go to decrimnow.com to donate to the legal fund go to litigatetoemancipate.com the sex worker rights org that is fighting to change the criminalized status of consenting adults engaging in consensual erotic services is ESPLERP the erotic service providers legal education and research network. The case is ESPLERP V GASCON and it’s in the 9th circuit currently. It has the potential to decriminalize 9 states if it is successful at the Supreme Court level. In the least it has the potential to decriminalize California which will be a HUGE step. A success will be a much needed legal precedent on behalf of all sex workers who will be able to use even a CA win as legal leverage in other states, though of equal importance it will be a historical first- as it will establish a legal platform pertaining to sexual privacy rights on behalf of ALL consenting adults whether they engage in consensual buying or selling of sex or NOT. This case takes Lawrence V Texas to the next step establishing that our relationships (including the exchange between two consenting adults in the context of sex work) are protected and acknowledged as a human right regardless of marriage being involved.

Seem important enough to you???

For some of us- decriminalization is much more than a talking point. It is more crucial than ever! It IS the strategy to establish the degree of harm reduction the criminalized sex worker community needs desperately by way of EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER LAW. As long as we are criminalized we are vulnerable and disenfranchised.

Besides not mentioning the ESPLERP V GASCON sex worker led case attempting to decriminalize I couldn’t help but notice neither of the sex workers quoted (or SAS or REST) mentioned that POLICE are the primary abusers of sex workers FACT which is caused and enabled by criminalization as is all of the ongoing human rights violations perpetrated upon sex workers.

This whole concept is laughable and ridiculous, why use deception if you're trying to reach out to exploited people? Why not put ads offering help alongside the ads for sex workers? At least the latter is honest outreach.

These are primal human urges, it's not possible to legislate or shame them away. In my opinion the best we'll ever be able to do is legalize the sex trade and manage it, and find better ways to make it easier for the exploited to escape those who are trafficking them.

There are a lot of people who who don't neatly fit into traditional dating scenes for lots of different reasons, if their outlets for sex are taken away, they go underground. Primal urges, remember? Either they have a safe and legal outlet for their urges or they go underground for satisfaction, there isn't much middle ground.

The urge for sex is just as natural as the urge to eat or use the bathroom, complicating it with ill conceived deceptions solves nothing and in fact causes even more problems.

The further stigmatization of sex work. It's now coming from the Right and the Progressive Left, particularly fringe left. I swear to god the left is worse than religious right wingers on this subject. Sat in a room recently where some lefty was talking about sex worker reenforcing the objectification of women, and supporting rape culture. Give me a f*cking break!

I worked for about 4 years. I didn't say anything to that mindless asshat about it though. I was more interested in delving deeper into why she thinks my choice to do what I will with my body as a sovereign being is in part the reason rape culture exists.

Rolando74: Who are you to decide what a woman does with her body? If a woman wants to charge money for sex what business is it of yours?

How is a woman exploited when both are adults, and entering into a consensual encounter. It's not a question because it's not exploitation.

It's hilarious how everyone keeps coming at me about prostituted women, when I agree with everyone here that prostituted women should not be prosecuted. Again, where I differ is that johns should be prosecuted. So really, you all are getting all worked up defending johns. Pretty weird.

And yes, my position is a feminist one. It's a radical feminist position with a long history. It is not a liberal feminist position, but I don't consider libfems actual feminists.

Rolando74: First off, there is nothing Radical about your view, and certainly nothing Feminist about it either. The radical thing to say is whether it be a man or a woman, both are entitled to exercise their sovereignty and do what they will with their body.

Going after the John is going after the livelihood of the prostitute. No matter how you dice it you are supporting a system that criminalizes a woman charging money for consensual sex. Obviously it's passive in that it targets the man and not the woman, but either way, it directly impacts her livelihood.

There are certainly women that work that do not like it. There are certainly ones who are taken advantage of by pimps, Johns, POLICE etc. One of my friend's was in NY working a number of years ago and a cop propositioned her and told her if she didn't give him a BJ he would arrest her. She was undocumented so of course she did it. But the vast majority I knew when I worked, they all worked because they enjoyed the opportunity it gave them to travel, to save to start a business in the future, etc.

Criminalizing either party that are engaged in a consensual interaction creates circumstances where women--and sometimes the John--have no viable course of action if something goes wrong. It needs to be decriminalized. Sex slavery, all that stuff, it's still illegal, and it still should be prosecuted, but that's not what's being discussed here.

Rolando74: I forgot to mention in my post that we do not agree. We don't even close to agree.

As others mentioned, this was not exactly an objectively unfavorable report. There were other viable options in the report, as well as option left out, but no one of course at the city mentions them. The got the cover they needed after they gave the ISP incumbents what they wanted. It seems clear from their comments in the media, that the Mayor's office and high level staff is not committed to Muni BB as the only real competition to ISP incumbents in the City of Seattle. The risks here are actually overstated, and anyone who reads that report in it's entirely and has been paying close attention to this for longer than the current city administration should understand how the market is evolving to dramatically reduce that risk. Muni Broadband was only dangled as a weak threat to leverage the negotiations with the incumbents. This was empty rhetoric with was nothing serious to back it up. $180K for a study that they rewrote so they could cherry pick it to sound responsible. Unless the city council steps in in a big way now, and that includes any of the current candidates after the election, it's as good as dead, again in this city. Bow to your ISP oligopoly overloards...

What the city is also not telling you, is we lost a lower cost option to use the City's dark fiber because of McGinn's and the Councils approval to lease all the excess to private corporations for their exclusive use. We have a mayor who does not bat an eyelash at a 900 million plus transporation levy, a record high Parks levy with no accountablity, and who designates his department heads to take the flack for his own incompetence, pandering, and fear.

That no one can bring themsleves to devote up to 50 percent of bonding capacity and make serious efforts for state and federal economic development federal grants in lieu of direct taxation for someting that has a cost benefit far beyond that is classic neoliberalism. This is not really all about the money. This is course disguised as prudent caution and playing the role of the "serious" admistrator on this issue. They are all amaeturs. We have a bunch of feckless, dullard, uncreative servants of the incumbent ISP's masquarading as serious people. This is the Nickles administration all over again.

Speak up Mayor Murray, and prove me wrong.

soory, old unintentional post....

Here is what I meant to say:
@7 Your position does not allow for voluntarily servicing a human need. And for something that is also free between consenting adults.

You don't have standing for branding someone else's choice that does not affect you one iota.

Briq House and Laura, thank you for your courage to speak out. In this area it seems you have to be an approved survivor to have a voice in this debate and the approval comes from the very industry that says they care and want to rescue you. The power structure of the question is disproportionate.

+90% of resources at Seattle Against Slavery are expended on wages and other payroll expenditures (taxes, etc.). OPS built up $112,000 in cash reserves from 2014 to 2015. Thurston County's Coalition Against Trafficking has on their FB page a link to the Everett Bikini legal question and notes that bikini baristas are indeed a form of human trafficking. The January 2016 bust was portrayed as a rescue when in fact earnings were confiscated, assets taken as evidence, evictions and lease penalties occurred, and then they were thrown on the street. The business cards to rescue orgs were tossed, no person used any of the services of the rescue industry. Beiser said they were absorbed by the criminal network. Beiser did not speak with a single person.

Beiser says that the chat bot is effective? 7,000 contact points to 40 possible use of services? That's less than 1%, without certainty. That's not effective, particularly if you do not examine the opportunity costs; more mistrust but who can blame sex workers for the awful treatment they receive from the exploiters within the rescue industry.

These are quasi-law enforcement groups. They do nothing to support human rights. They hold police accountable, push for new laws every year, and they raise awareness. But they distort statistics, mis-appropriate the language, and obfuscate the damage they create. The internet has improved working conditions but these groups want to destroy that aspect in order to make things more difficult for all involved, so that, as post #1 mentioned, they can congratulate themselves. The primary tool they use is to publicly shame all involved and the collateral damage done to families is of no concern.

Sex is not a human need.

RedPillSeattle, radical feminism is an ideology. One of its tenets is the abolition of prostitution. You shouldn't talk about things you're ignorant of.

rolando74: You are totally messing with me, funny. "Sex is not a human need," you're correct, it's a biological imperative.

So radical feminism is against a woman exercising her sovereignty and doing what she will with her body? I didn't come by this name out of the f*cking blue. Well, it was kinda out of the blue. There's nothing Radical, nor Feminist about any ideological stance that seeks to rob a woman of her sovereignty, and dictate what she chooses to do with her body.

RedPillSeattle, "sex is not a human need" was directed at Nemo, not at you.

Also: you're embarrassing yourself. You don't understand the words you're using. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_fe…

A "sacred sex worker" - I read a book when I was 11 (very educational reading!) about an ancient city in the Middle East where temple virgins were awarded to the highest-producing farmer after the annual harvest. Same shit, different century: women being used like livestock. You go, girl.

Cool. SO, I guess if I were to ever hit CL or whatever, all I would have to do is ignore badly spelled stuff that disintegrates into word salad? Cuz, that would be about the level a Microsoft engineer would probably be able to make it.

The UN estimates that, worldwide, 21 million people are trafficked into forced labor, 4.5 million of which are victims of sex trafficking. So about 20% of human trafficking involves sexual exploitation. These are just estimates, but they are the foundation on which the U.S. anti-trafficking movement is based on.
In a 2015 report for Truthout, Anne Moore wrote that the top 50 anti-trafficking organizations in the U.S. focus primarily on female victims of forced sexual exploitation - a slim fifth of what the ILO suggests is a global labor crisis. And that the goal of these organizations is to eliminate prostitution by raising a moral panic to help push through their conservative agenda. And as it turns out, leading a moral crusade is also very lucrative.
Evidently anti-trafficking organizations in the U.S. receive about $686 million a year in funding, and this doesn't include $1.5 billion per year in federal funds spent to fight human trafficking. Since most of these organizations were formed between 2006 and 2008, the US anti-trafficking movement is one of the few strong growth areas in the post-recession economy besides low-wage service work.
Given the $686 million anti-trafficking budget shared by these organizations (which doesn't count federal costs), this breaks down to an average budget of $343,000 per case - certainly enough to secure each victim a safe place to live for at least a year. Yet a 2013 report found only 682 beds available, nationwide, to victims of trafficking, with another 354 more planned for 2014.
These organizations habitually quote other groups' dubious lists of facts or recycle the same disproven or vague statistics without citation. Ronald Weitzer, in the May 2014 Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, states the matter cleanly: "None of the trafficking claims - huge magnitude, growing problem, ranking among criminal enterprises, most prevalent type - have been substantiated.”
Half of the U.S. anti-trafficking organizations that submitted annual reports claimed to have saved 8,676 total individuals from sex trafficking, which we could use to estimate what the other non-reporting organizations might conceivably claim to have released nearly 17,000 individuals from sex trafficking - about half the number of sex-trafficking cases reported in the entire world in 2014.
This exercise provides a glimpse of how outsized the claims made by anti-trafficking organizations are. All in all, the impact numbers presented by anti-trafficking organizations - their justification for existence and, of course, funding - are simply absurd.

Another example of Mr. Beiser's work…WA State Task Force Against the Trafficking of Persons, of which Mr. Beiser is a member, made a recommendation 6-5-2017 which was to fund 3 full-time FTE’s placed within rescue orgs such as his: “…These positions would also develop an assessment tool to identify housing options that are accessible, affirming, and safe for survivors. Using that tool, the Housing Coordinators would update a resources list to share statewide.”

The recommendation was to provide funding for rescue orgs.