• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1861 year ago

    Alleged prospective sex buyers in this scheme first had to respond to a survey and provide information online, including their driver’s license photos, their employer information, credit card information, and they often paid a monthly fee to be part of this.”

    Wait, what? (͡•_ ͡• )

    That should make the prosecutors jobs much easier.

    • squiblet
      link
      fedilink
      1161 year ago

      Wow, imagine willingly providing that information to what you know is a criminal organization. The people who signed up are obviously a major security hazard to whoever they work for.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        1161 year ago

        Yeah. This is the real issue here.

        Sex work should be legal and the morality discussion here is about people lying to their spouses and if anybody is being forced into sex work… all interesting topics.

        But anybody implicated in this situation needs all security clearances and access dropped because they are high risk morons.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          31 year ago

          Or better yet, we actually publicly prosecute them, or at least “accidentally” leak the list

          I’m guessing this is prostitution with extra steps to make sure they can wiggle out of it, but if we actually held them to consequences things would get better quickly

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        331 year ago

        100%. I wouldn’t even give all that information to my online pharmacist and I need some of those medications to survive.

        • Lem Jukes
          link
          fedilink
          111 year ago

          Yeah my employer don’t need to know fuckall about what meds I’m on.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        23
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Seriously. How dumb do you need to be to be in an actual high ranking (government) position and willingly give up all that info to an even slightly shady organisation? Never mind an illegal prostitution network you are sure is both illegal and easily blackmailable.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          91 year ago

          Say something is exclusive and idiots will do anything to get in.

          Facebook got so huge because at first you had to be in college to be on it. After a couple years they opened it up to everyone and pretty much everyone signed up.

    • IninewCrow
      link
      fedilink
      English
      36
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The ease of prosecuting is directly proportional to how wealthy and influential the accused is.

      Remember, it’s a legal system … not a justice system … you can easily distinguish the difference by how wealthy you are (or are not)

    • IWantToFuckSpez
      link
      fedilink
      18
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Could be a honey pot. Either the guys running it wanted to use the info to blackmail the clientele or sell the info to foreign intelligence

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      61 year ago

      I’m guessing it was that one P411 website or whatever. That site has been in the news in the past. It baffles me that people would willingly comply with such invasive identification requirements for something that’s illegal. I get the idea behind it is to try and prove that you’re not a cop/murdery type of criminal in order to protect the sex workers, but… yeah, lol.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 year ago

      Not really, because the people who made the survey are probably smart enough to not include anything about exchanging money for sex. Basically, there’s nothing illegal about filling out a survey about who you are and what are your likes or dislikes. There’s also nothing illegal for someone to pay another person for their time.

      So no mention of exchanging money for sex and it’s incredibly hard to prosecute.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        51 year ago

        No idea if you’re right or not but that’s not what I meant. I meant they don’t have to hunt down the johns, the johns already provided all the possible info the prosecutors would need to find them.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          I think what the person above was implying is that having your name on that list is not de-facto evidence of participation. I’m sure the DOJ has more than just that one piece of evidence if they’ve already made arrests, because sex workers in America are nothing if not extremely careful about how they conduct their business to avoid exposing themselves or their clients to law enforcement stings.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            Hell, if they’re actually smart, they have red herrings in the list that muddies who is actually a client

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          0
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Are Johns (and sex workers) even worth prosecuting? I think the DOJ is interested in a organized prostitution ring and it’s leaders, involved in conspiracy and money laundering, not a few dudes paying for (adult) sex.

          I don’t think they’ll waste their time.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          01 year ago

          How exactly does that help? It’s not like they are going to do stake outs on these guys. It’s not enough probable cause for any type of warrant or anything.

          It would help support a case if you already had one, but as an entry point it’s all but completely useless, if not actually completely useless.

          Which is why they won’t release the names, because doing so would open them up to lawsuits. All risk no reward.

    • DigitalTraveler42
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Criminals and criminals masquerading as religions love to get blackmail on their clientele/members, it’s probably the more lucrative part of their enterprise, and it keeps those members/clientele loyal, because who wants their nasty ass secrets leaked out or sold to their enemies?

    • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
      link
      fedilink
      41 year ago

      None of that’s illegal, aside from the card info it’s actually a lot of the things a trustworthy sex worker will be asking you for as a background check before agreeing to meet you.

    • El Barto
      link
      fedilink
      881 year ago

      Selling is legal, fucking is legal, why isn’t selling fucking legal?

      – George Carlin

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          141 year ago

          For years I’ve contemplated the idea if I came into a bunch of money if starting a porn studio where the customer is an actor/actress in the porn.

          We have a building and several “sets” with cameras recording, customer picks their “partner” and “set” and “shoot the porn”, after they are done the video is burned on to a dvd(or blue ray or potentially put on a private file server).

          The customer isn’t paying for sex, they are paying for the video.

          Pretty sure it would have a ton of legal push back and I would need a lot of money for the lawyers to fight the cases.

          But 1. Safer for everyone imvolved(it’s video taped so you won’t beat/hurt/kill the other party) 2.technically legal just like shooting porn

          • El Barto
            link
            fedilink
            31 year ago

            This is actually a great idea for couples! The issue of course would be to make sure that the couples are actual couples.

            You could have them sign a release indicating that it’s a “photo studio”, and you can have different prices: one for commercial use ($5,000 per hour) and one for private use ($100 an hour, and you’re not allowed to commercially distribute the DVD.)

          • oshu
            link
            fedilink
            11 year ago

            Think there is a big group of customers for sex who want it captured on video?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              They get the only copy… I don’t care if the watch it, post it online or just it for skeet shooting with a shotgun.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              11 year ago

              You could burn it to a dvd or whatever, delete the file, and give the customer the only copy. Whether they choose to keep it or destroy it is their own choice.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              11 year ago

              Not to mention the possible tie ins…imagine if the studio partnered with onlyfans… Or offered special spaces with live streaming(with permission) to people’s Webcam sites.

              “remember to join the stream this Saturday where we will be on location in the pleasure dome’s sunset beach set for a special sex on the beach adventure”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      531 year ago

      The underlying assumption is the same as in abortion: that women can’t be entrusted with agency over their own bodies.

    • Hillock
      link
      fedilink
      341 year ago

      Because one of the biggest issues with sex work, human trafficking, gets worse with legalization. Studies across Europe have shown that countries that outlaw prostitution see a decrease in human trafficking victims while countries that legalized or decriminalized it see an increase.

      Unlike with drugs, you don’t just create a way to increase the supply. A very small minority of women actually want to engage in sex work. And the few who do, usually envision the high class escort lifestyle. But working in a brothel charging $100 per client isn’t something many want to do.

      But legalizing prostitution increases demand. Which makes it more profitable for criminals to utilize human trafficking to fill that demand.

      https://orgs.law.harvard.edu/lids/2014/06/12/does-legalized-prostitution-increase-human-trafficking/

      One source of it.

      It also doesn’t help at all with protecting victims of human trafficking. Victims of human trafficking are already protected. But they don’t step forward because of threats against their own well being and that of their families. Something that doesn’t change just because their work technically is legal now.

      Which leaves a small percentage of people who fall into financial hardship and consider prostitution as a method of overcoming said hardship. For them that might slightly improve their situation. But that still means exploiting vulnerable people and isn’t people engaging in sex work because they want to. And it’s even questionable if people in these scenarios would follow the legal way.

      So while initially it might seem like legalizing it solves a lot of issues, it is more difficult than that.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        141 year ago

        Us laws regarding sex work are firmly based in puritanical values not out of any concern whatsoever regarding trafficking.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        12
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I reckon that even though sex work is legalised, and still caused issues, the problem is that there is no government regulation. It’s one thing to say by the government that they won’t prosecute sex workers, but if it’s not regulated and abuse still happens then nothing changed for all intents and purposes. Best analogy I could think of is like allowing food factories to manufacture food, of course. But if there is no regulatory watchdog to monitor and test to make sure food factories are not putting random and dangerous stuff into food, then legalising an activity is pointless.

        Basically, the sex industry having been legalised by many countries is unofficially a libertarian set up. Yeah, the government exists and allow sexual transactions between agreeing parties, but they’re hands off on how the practitioners in the industry would conduct business. There is no government agency for sex workers to complain to if they’re abused. I know people would ask, how exactly would the government regulate sex? That, I will leave to policy experts.

        Edit: wording

      • El Barto
        link
        fedilink
        101 year ago

        Thanks for the data. I think the issue here is not that legal prostitution creates problems, but rather the government bodies being incompetent at protecting the victims, then.

        There are other industries in which people “sell their bodies” for profit (the military and construction come to mind), and if those can be quite regulated, why can’t prostitution?

        • Cethin
          link
          fedilink
          English
          61 year ago

          We all sell our bodies for profit. To be fair though, wage theft is the most common form of theft. We’re all prostitutes and we’re almost all being taken advantage of, and we’re in a system where we can’t really get out.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          31 year ago

          government bodies being incompetent at protecting the victims, then.

          My guess is that it’s just more difficult to control prostitution than it is to control construction work. Construction happens in the open, you need to get tons of permits, multiple companies are involved, inspectors check everything regularly. It would be difficult to force some people to work on a construction site without anyone realizing. But how are you going to make sure that each sexual intercourse in some strip bar is ‘legal’? Are you going to put inspectors in bathroom stalls? How can you check every cash transaction? It’s pretty much impossible. You can monitor the sex work that’s advertised and happening ‘in the open’ but there will always be some grey and black market for it. And the ugly stuff will happen there.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        71 year ago

        I see this single study trotted out every time the subject comes up and the key factor to take into account is that this is reported trafficking. If legalized sex work means more light is shed on human trafficking that means more can be done about it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          Afaraf
          01 year ago

          key factor to take into account is that this is reported trafficking. If legalized sex work means more light is shed on human trafficking that means more can be done about it.

          Just because more is reported doesn’t mean more isn’t also happening. In fact, one could reasonably expect reporting to go down as a percentage of incidents due to ordinary citizens not expecting sex workers to be involved in trafficking since sex work is now legal. That the number goes up after the stigma is removed seems to strongly indicate a correlation with a rise in actual trafficking.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            01 year ago

            More or less is a matter of comparison. How do you compare with an underground activity that cannot be tracked as easily?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              Afaraf
              01 year ago

              How do you compare with an underground activity that cannot be tracked as easily?

              As with anything, you can only work with the data you actually have.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                01 year ago

                Sure, but all you have is assumptions and you’re assuming the increased reporting of trafficking means that trafficking is increasing rather than it just getting caught more. It’s like when some governments fought over covid reporting. Keeping it hidden doesn’t mean less of it is happening and making it more visible doesn’t mean more of it is happening.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  Afaraf
                  0
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Sure, but all you have is assumptions

                  Isn’t that a bit of the pot calling the kettle black?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        Because one of the biggest issues with sex work, human trafficking, gets worse with legalization.

        Yes, because legalizing sex work is just criminalizing sex work with extra steps. It’s very easy to see an (alleged) “rise in sex trafficking” when the legalization shuffle allows politicians to all of a sudden decide what is “allowed” sex work and what is “sex trafficking.”

        This is why shitty studies like the one you linked is so thoroughly non-credible - it was performed without the input of the people who actually know what they are talking about - ie, sex workers themselves.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          What the fuck are you talking about?

          legalizing sex work is just criminalizing sex work with extra steps

          So what’s the solution?? You just made random assertions without any sources and didn’t suggest any alternatives. All while skimming over the very real trafficking/coersion problems unique to sex work.

          • JackbyDev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 year ago

            I was totally onboard with them but the longer they talk the weirder the takes get.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              21 year ago

              Do tell… is this the first time you’ve actually considered what sex workers themselves have to say about (so-called) “legalization?”

              The sex workers with those opinions usually are the already more well off workers who perform escort or cam services, and isn’t reflective of the bottom strata of sex worker experiences. It also doesn’t address how more common sex work leads to higher trafficking rates.

              trafficking is not unique to sex work in any way, shape, or form.

              Lol I’d love any source on this whatsoever. I’m not sure how you defend this line of thought, or why you feel this way. You don’t think human trafficking shares any of the same risk factors or conditions as sex work?

              ROFLMAO!

              LOLCOPTER

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                01 year ago

                and isn’t reflective of the bottom strata of sex worker experiences.

                You’re going to have to do a whole lot better than hiding behind impoverished people.

                It also doesn’t address how more common sex work leads to higher trafficking rates.

                That has already been explained to you.

                Lol I’d love any source on this whatsoever.

                You need a source to tell you that labor and refugee trafficking is a thing?

                I’m not sure how you defend this line of thought,

                It’s really simple… I have no wish to demonize and criminalize sex workers - unlike you.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      191 year ago

      My bet is on America’s conservative puritan history where anything good is bad.

      Also sex trafficking. At least that’s the argument for keeping it illegal. :(

      • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
        link
        fedilink
        61 year ago

        Which is bollocks anyways because illegalization actually makes things less safe for all sex workers, but especially for trafficking victims who are now legally marginalized into dark number status

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      181 year ago

      Old white men elected themselves under the guise of voting (gerrymandering who?) and are too embarrassed and confused to allow women the rights they have as humans. Isn’t democracy silly.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      131 year ago

      I’d say the diagram of “Why is sex work illegal” and “Why is abortion illegal” is almost a perfect circle.

      It’s about contolling other peoples’ bodies and weakening the separation of church and state.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      71 year ago

      AFAIK, it’s not federally illegal, but mostly every state bans it. As how Nevada can have prostitution.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        11 year ago

        You’re correct, it is not federally illegal in the US. Most things aren’t. Murder isn’t, either. However, traveling across state lines with a prostitute has gotten people in trouble with the federal government before.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      61 year ago

      Sex work differs from most other type of work in one very significant way - it’s an industry in which capitalists cannot really control the means of production unless slavery (ie, a person can become the private property of another) is legalized and institutionalized. In other words, a sex worker - for the most part - is not as easily coerced into selling their labor to capitalists like most workers can be, and capitalists hate when people have a way to opt out of being hosts for their parasitism.

      Sex work also has a way of subverting patriarchal norms upon which the status quo rests.

      This is not to say that sex work is automatically a revolutionary, anti-capitalist or even “empowering” thing by itself - there are plenty of ways in which our socio-economic systems allows and enables de facto slavery without calling it slavery - but it certainly doesn’t fit into the neat class hierarchy that capitalists wants society to be trapped within.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        101 year ago

        You’re reading too much into it. The primary reason is puritan values. To be fair, the taboo on promiscuity is likely due to the lack of contraceptives and risks of getting sexually transmitted diseases. But access to contraceptives and education would lessen the risks these days. Though people are still creatures of habits so sex and sex work are still taboo for many without questioning why it has been in the first place.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          71 year ago

          You’re reading too much into it.

          No, I’m not… in fact, I’m not even scratching the surface.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        6
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Sex work also has a way of subverting patriarchal norms upon which the status quo rests.

        cough, what? No, it reinforces those norms. Men in power get to have women at their beck and call.

        This isn’t a capitalist thing. Just look at how profitable the sex industry is in Nevada.

        It’s a “holier than thou” thing that we just haven’t been able to get rid of in our society.

        As much as I like calling out greed for what it is, this simply isn’t one of those cases.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -21 year ago

          cough, what?

          You read correctly the first time. It’s a lot more difficult to entrap sex workers in patriarchal hierarchies than a housewife (for instance)… this should not be too difficult to understand.

          This isn’t a capitalist thing.

          All sex work in the world today exists under a capitalist mode of production - as far as I can tell, there is (officially, at least) no such thing as “publicly-funded” sex work… and that is unfortunate.

          • JackbyDev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            51 year ago

            as far as I can tell, there is (officially, at least) no such thing as “publicly-funded” sex work… and that is unfortunate.

            You lost me.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -31 year ago

              Due to both criminalization and demonization, sex workers are prevented from performing very necessary work in our society - such as being the only people that are qualified to perform sex education, for instance - so yes… it is quite unfortunate that sex work cannot be performed as a service to the public.

              • JackbyDev
                link
                fedilink
                English
                31 year ago

                Sex education is more about the changes your body goes through during puberty as well as how reproduction works. None of that is related to sex work. Sex work is about making people feel good.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -41 year ago

                  Sex education is more about the changes your body goes through during puberty as well as how reproduction works.

                  That’s basic biology - not sex education. The fact that you can’t even discern the difference proves the point.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        41 year ago

        Wait till you learn that you can be self employed outside of sex work.

        For the most parts its just christian morality still ingrained in our society.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          -31 year ago

          Wait till you learn that you can be self employed outside of sex work.

          Yes, the homeless people trying to sell me trinkets at the intersection certainly seems to prove your point.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            91 year ago

            The only self employed people you can think of are homeless dudes selling trinkets and prostitutes?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              -71 year ago

              The vast majority of “self-employed” people are utterly impoverished people doing survival work, Clyde - please tell me you don’t buy into the “entrepreneurship” fairy tales Reagan and Thatcher spooned into your parents’ brains through the telly back in the 80s. If you believed that, you might just as well believe in magic glass slippers that grants royalty.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                51 year ago

                You are confusing being self employed with gig economy bullshit. There are a lot of fields of occupation where being self employed makes sense und gives you more freedom. By the way - I’m talking from own experience being self employed fore quite some time now.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  -51 year ago

                  There are people living in shacks within a kilometer from where I’m typing this, Clyde… every second person living there has more (so-called) “entrepreneurship” in their big toe than you have in your entire body because they literally have to do it for survival.

                  I’m not confusing squat… the only thing you’ve managed to demonstrate here is that you talk from privilege and nothing else.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        01 year ago

        I disagree with this entire claim. Sex workers are notorious for “having a price” to do nearly anything. I would say they are more susceptible to doing disgusting shit for money. There’s a reason why there’s an ongoing joke about sex workers getting shit on during their trips to dubai.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          01 year ago

          Sex workers are notorious for “having a price” to do nearly anything.

          And what do you think the rest of us do, eh Clyde? How many sex workers have to piss in bottles to make Jeff Bezos richer?

          There’s a reason we don’t use the term “prostitute” any more - it’s got something to do with the fact that understanding how capitalism works very quickly makes it real clear who the real “prostitutes” are…

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            01 year ago

            I think sex workers are pressured to get into progressively more disgusting shit because that’s what pays. The market is flooded at this point and the only thing you can do to stick out is either be famous or be willing to degrade yourself.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                -2
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                I’m expressing my opinion on a public forum. I hate how internet comments have become an eternal game of gotchas. I can be aware of a topic without participating in it.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  21 year ago

                  Is your opinion an informed one? Or are you just regurgitating propaganda you assume to be your opinion?

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              0
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I have an MSc from a top UK university, my dissertation topic was labour abuse and work-related harm for which I received a distinction. I’m no puritan, but genuine “sex work” (outside the internet) is overwhelmingly negative for the actual workers and very few enter the industry from a position of personal or economic empowerment. This is the case to a shocking degree, even where it’s decriminalised. I’m not against it, per se, but it confuses me when people are strongly for it. So yeah, stay woke.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          21 year ago

          I think most people who’ve actually thought about it would say either “sensitivity to and awareness of the plight of marginalized people” or the same but with “oversensitivity”, depending on which side of it you’re on.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    1261 year ago

    I’m assuming they’re arresting the sex workers and not the politicians and military officials?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      291 year ago

      Hopefully neither, and they’ll arrest the organizers/pimps/etc.

      sex workers and clients should be the lowest priority.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        81 year ago

        You know what they say about hoping, you can hope in one hand and bang an escort in the other hand and see which hand fills up quicker.

    • Ð Greıt Þu̇mpkin
      link
      fedilink
      151 year ago

      They’d probably have to confirm identities to arrest those folks, and also prove they aren’t just getting name-dropped.

      Just grabbing the pimps and workers is a lot easier and less case intense

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    781 year ago

    Anybody remember that one piece about our servicemen being involved in trafficking women overseas about three years ago that was swept under the rug?

  • sylver_dragon
    link
    fedilink
    English
    751 year ago

    Customers are not named in the affidavit, according to the agent, because the investigation into their involvement is “active and ongoing.” these are the type of people who don’t get held accountable, ever.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      41 year ago

      Accountable for what? Something that should be legal in the first place?

      Do you also think marijuana users should be named and shamed?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        It should be legal but it’s not. Those are government officials with clearances which put up their Driver’s licenses and credit card information on an illegal site to bang hookers. That’s the issue.

        The “name and shame” argument is also meaningless. Take marijuana for example. If you’re a government official who is actively pushing for legalization and it comes up that you actually consume it… ok? Big news, you’re putting your mouth where your money is. Nobody cares, there’s no “shame” in being “named”. The issue comes when people are publicly against marijuana/prostitution and then engage in it. Those are hypocrites and should be shamed.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      0
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Or, you know, they don’t have any evidence that a crime actually was committed. These people aren’t morons and know that unless they are caught exchanging money for sex they are off the hook. The fact that they have their name in this group is not even remotely enough to even charge someone with a crime, let alone get a conviction.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    641 year ago

    Ah, yes, 4-star generals in Procurement retiring to gold-plated consulting gigs in the very companies from which they ordered $1000 paper clips and congressional members using insider info from some congressional comission or other they’re in for trading on their portfolios is all fine, it’s paying for sex that’s the real problem with holders of high level official positions in America.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      191 year ago

      The bribery potential of those officials violating the laws they’re publicly supporting is the problem.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          61 year ago

          Hoover amassed significant power by collecting files containing large amounts of compromising and potentially embarrassing information on many powerful people, especially politicians.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        31 year ago

        True. Which is why it should be legalized and regulated. Very difficult to bribe someone with something they can just have whenever they want.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        They said the same thing to justify banning gays from working for the government or serving in the military.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          111 year ago

          Because lies are a security risk. Which is a major part of why it’s better to allow them into service openly. No secrets from the service, no leverage for betrayal.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            81 year ago

            The show For All Mankind did a good take on the problem IMO. Being gay wasn’t illegal per se, but gay people could not be employed at NASA. They still joined, but they kept their orientation hidden. Then the security forces used the justification that gays keeping secrets were vulnerable to blackmail to go on witch hunts to seek and root out gays, and to defend the decision to ban gays from employment in the first place. It was a circular argument through-and-through. The base reason has always been prejudice. Didn’t help that in the show there were real Soviet spies running around trying to find gays to extort for NASA rocket secrets.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      61 year ago

      “It sure would be unfortunate if someone was to send pictures to the family, bosses and the media.”

      The potential for being compromised and coerced into overlooking a few budget items is one path to this graft.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    481 year ago

    The client list will likely go in the same vault as Epstein’s. They’re all assets now.

    • Cosmic Cleric
      link
      fedilink
      English
      51 year ago

      They’re all assets now.

      In the age of Trump, are those really assets anymore?

      Seems like they’re moreso assets of a bygone era.

  • toiletobserver
    link
    fedilink
    38
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I’m sure they’ll be arresting and charging the politicians any and revoking security clearances any moment now…

  • dumdum666
    link
    fedilink
    31
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I really don’t understand the way the US works in regards to „bought“ sex… on the one hand prostitution is illegal (with the exception of Las Vegas parts of Nevada) and as soon as you point a camera on the paid fucking it is called PORN and it is still a multi billion dollar industry.

    You guys are weird

    Edit: changed the Las Vegas part

    • teft
      link
      fedilink
      24
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Prostitution isn’t legal in Vegas. Parts of Nevada yes, but in Clark county where Las Vegas is located prostitution is illegal.

    • It’s very bizarre. Kinda shocking the gov’t hasn’t figured out the massive amount of tax revenue behind the legalization of sex workers.

      • dumdum666
        link
        fedilink
        16
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Works in other countries at least. Here in Germany they just pay income tax, like everyone else. Actually they are freelancers usually…

        On the other hand, Germany is still a bit backwards regarding cannabis legalization… but we are working on it.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          01 year ago

          Illegal income is taxed, technically, but paying that tax would also basically be a confession. That’s how they got mobsters back in the day. So there ends up not being any when you’re right and there absolutely could be good tax revenue there

          Hell, it’s not federally banned, so it’s just states not being willing.

    • squiblet
      link
      fedilink
      131 year ago

      There are porn producers who do such a crappy job that I’d swear they only film so they have legal access to prostitution.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        41 year ago

        Like 90% of OF “fan meets” are filmed fucks because it’s actually prostitution. Pretty sad they can’t be honest because some people had weir hangups hundreds of years ago

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          11 year ago

          Go on any hookup app or site and you’ll see plenty of “content creators” willing to meet up and “make content.”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      131 year ago

      It started a few centuries ago when this annoying group of people known as Puritans were expelled from their home country and sailed to north America.

      The natives saved them from starvation and today still impose their beliefs and values on everybody. These hypocritical laws is but one example

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        10
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        They were not expelled from anywhere. They wanted to impose their religious doctrine on everyone else but every government keep telling them to fuck off.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        41 year ago

        The Puritans were a small sect, just looking for the religious freedom to punish the best majority of people who didn’t believe the Puritans’ theology. Their notion of “religious freedom” is similar to the U.S. Catholic bishops’ notion. It’s a violation of religious freedom when people can make their own choices, and don’t have to obey a hierarchy.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      71 year ago

      What’s weird is that loophole exists and people don’t abuse it.

      Like, I get the streetwalkers selling $10 BJs dont, but for “high end” organizations like this, just stick an old school camcorder in the room and let the John keep whatever grainy unidentifiable footage they make during the encounter.

      If you’re ever investigated, you’re in the clear. If not, then no one even has to know.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        20
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Pretty sure the forms required for filming adult entertainment include personally identifiable information, so no, it’s not just ‘add a camera and now it’s porn’.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        111 year ago

        Nah. A group tried this in Pensacola and got busted. Can’t remember the details, but they were trying to pass prostitution off as pr0n because camera. Didn’t fly.

      • roguetrick
        link
        fedilink
        7
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I bet employment fraud would have a bigger jail sentence than prostitution.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      It’s called the “First Amendment,” and you’ll find it can be used to justify/unjustify all sorts of things depending on the current government in power.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    261 year ago

    In this day and age where nothing stays secret, how is it hard for elected officials not do stupid stuff like visiting brothels?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      121 year ago

      Where else are they going to get sex? From the woman they live with that is laughably called their wife?

      Look at Ted Cruz and tell me that there is a woman on the planet earth who will allow him inside her without money being exchanged.

    • LemmyInRedditSux
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      Because elected officials are above the law until someone decides to blackmail them.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    241 year ago

    If the girls were sex trafficked I have a problem with this, if they were free to do as they please, then I have no issue with this.

    • squiblet
      link
      fedilink
      201 year ago

      Since it’s illegal and probably secret from their wives, it opens the client to blackmail, which isn’t good for the public if they’re in government or military.

    • DontMakeMoreBabies
      link
      fedilink
      11
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Regardless of whether someone was trafficked, folks in positions of power chosing* to disregard the law is itself an issue.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        Not really.

        I’d give 0 shits if people in ‘positions of power’ smoked marijuana while it was illegal.

        Heck, I’d support them for their civil disobedience!

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    10
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Who would have thought it. A brothel in Watertown. Cambridge I can see. What’s next, strip clubs in Belmont, Mitt Romney’s home town?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      61 year ago

      It’s because when people in highly-sensitive positions of power do things that they want to keep secret, they become a security risk by opening themselves up to the threat of blackmail.

      Whether or not they should want to keep their whoring secret is a different matter between them and their families and their voters. I don’t have a censorious take on that, I’m just telling you why it’s a security risk and is newsworthy.