ewx: (Default)
[personal profile] ewx
[Poll #1053551]

(NB for the last two questions - "results viewable to none" means "viewable to [livejournal.com profile] ewx", and of course in theory to LJ's operators.)

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-11 01:43 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mooism.livejournal.com
If, as a result of taking the view that prostitutes are forced into it, we criminalise everyone paying for sex as well as the pimps, then we criminalise those who pay for sex with someone who’s not been forced into it. I think that would be wrong.

And also counter-productive. We need to persuade men who use prostitutes to not use prostitutes who’ve been forced into it. Prosecuting men who pay for sex with women who’ve been forced into it, whilst leaving legal paying for sex with women who do it by choice, may be a way of doing this.

I was shocked to read that 100% of men who pay for sex wouldn’t be put off if the woman they’d paid for sex had been forced into it. (100%: Not a single buyer of sex in the poll sample said they’d be put off.)

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-11 03:25 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] truecatachresis.livejournal.com
Wow, that's a horrifying statistic. Where was the survey taken, as I can imagine that there may be differing groups of clients with different opinions?

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-11 05:01 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mooism.livejournal.com
It was mentioned at the end of a recent news article on the government’s proposal. I don’t know who carried out the survey, the sample size, whether it was carried out in a single location or across the country, any useful background information really :-\

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-11 05:27 pm (UTC)
ext_8103: (Default)
From: [identity profile] ewx.livejournal.com
I have trouble believing the 100% figure; I'd at least expect some people to lie about it.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-11 06:19 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] armb.livejournal.com
Why would anyone lie saying they wouldn't be put off when they would? The other way around I can understand. Or do you mean that a reported 100% figure must be wrong even if it's the true figure because even if none of them would be put off some would lie and pretend they would?

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-11 06:22 pm (UTC)
ext_8103: (Default)
From: [identity profile] ewx.livejournal.com
The latter; I'd expect some people to hide the fact that they would not be put off.

(no subject)

Date: 2007-09-11 08:06 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mstevens.livejournal.com
I've heard different results (iirc that it's mostly but not totally the other way), I think there was something about it on this blog: http://www.wakingvixen.com/blog/ somewhere.

November 2025

S M T W T F S
      1
2345678
91011121314 15
1617 181920 2122
23242526272829
30      

Most Popular Tags

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags