this post was submitted on 08 Nov 2023
705 points (98.8% liked)

News

23287 readers
4421 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] hogunner@lemmy.world 172 points 1 year ago (11 children)

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@kbin.social 106 points 1 year ago (3 children)

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.

[–] Phlogiston@lemmy.world 107 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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.

[–] ChaoticEntropy@feddit.uk 37 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's signing up to a blackmail scheme.

[–] hemmes@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] hogunner@lemmy.world 29 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] Lemjukes@lemm.ee 11 points 1 year ago

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

[–] cuibono@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

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.

[–] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] ininewcrow@lemmy.ca 31 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

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)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] David_Eight@lemmy.world 135 points 1 year ago (43 children)

Why is sex work even illegal in the first place.

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 81 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

-- George Carlin

[–] Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com 28 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Seas he also the fella that said “Getting paid for sex is illegal… UNLESS YOU RECORD IT!”

[–] vrek@programming.dev 13 points 1 year ago (5 children)

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

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] quindraco@lemm.ee 48 points 1 year ago

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

[–] stella@lemm.ee 19 points 1 year ago

Puritan values.

[–] Asafum@feddit.nl 18 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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. :(

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] momtheregoesthatman@lemmy.world 17 points 1 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.

[–] Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world 12 points 1 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.

[–] Igloojoe@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (36 replies)
[–] GR4VY@lemm.ee 120 points 1 year ago (3 children)

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

[–] tookmyname@lemmy.ml 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

sex workers and clients should be the lowest priority.

[–] INHALE_VEGETABLES@aussie.zone 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

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.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] roofuskit@lemmy.world 21 points 1 year ago

3 individuals sounds like just the pimps.

[–] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 15 points 1 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

[–] shiroininja@lemmy.world 74 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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

[–] Rhoeri@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

I only remember the rug as I’m supposed to.

[–] sylver_dragon@lemmy.world 69 points 1 year ago (4 children)

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.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Aceticon@lemmy.world 62 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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.

[–] Skyrmir@lemmy.world 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Nobody@lemmy.world 45 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] toiletobserver@lemmy.world 37 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

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

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] tronx4002@lemmy.world 26 points 1 year ago (4 children)

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

[–] Murais@lemmy.one 46 points 1 year ago (14 children)

In this day and age, why aren't brothels and sex work legal?

[–] roboticide@lemmy.world 13 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Buddy, we're still working on legalizing an absurdly common plant because for a while much of the country thought it was satanic or whatever.

"In this day and age," in America, of course it's not legal yet. That is gonna take a long time.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[–] afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world 11 points 1 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.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] YoBuckStopsHere@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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@kbin.social 18 points 1 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.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] fleabomber@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Oh sure, blame the capitalist.

[–] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I'd blame the communist, but communism is just a red herring.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] guleblanc@lemmy.world 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 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?

[–] vamp07@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And this is illegal and newsworthy why?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›