Jump to content

Deshaun Watson admits under oath that Ashley Solis cried at the end of the massage


Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, mannc said:

 

Quotes from a state’s attorney are not evidence.

 

Lol so the women managed to get out of China and ended up living in the same massage parlor eating cat food but weren’t trafficked?  Gotcha.  Have you invested in the Brooklyn bridge again lately?

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Agree 1
  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, TheWeatherMan said:

I think the general consensus is that legal pay for sex would lead to increased human trafficking.  There’s a couple articles on that as well.  

The same arguments were made here in Canada against legalization of cannabis, it would create more black mark demand, the exact opposite has occurred. The illegal sales have all but disappeared.

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, julian said:

The same arguments were made here in Canada against legalization of cannabis, it would create more black mark demand, the exact opposite has occurred. The illegal sales have all but disappeared.

 

I don't think it is a like for like comparison. Mainly because the person as a commodity is different to the drug as the commodity. The best case study is Germany where prostitution has, for the most part, always been legal. The financial arguments and the labor rights arguments are borne out by that experience. It does bring in good tax revenues, it does generally lead to sex workers being better protected and having a safer environment in which to work. However, it has not prevented trafficking. In fact the numbers have soared in Germany of women trafficked in order to enter the sex industry over the last decade. Those trafficked women are often controlled by pimps and work a sort of under the radar black market. 

 

It is an interesting debate. A factor that should also be considered is how the internet in recent years has created a new generation of sex worker who operates through these video sites - OnlyFans etc. That is a wild west that governments across the world have struggled to regulate (or even agree whether regulation is appropriate) and it does bring into question whether leaving traditional sex workers criminalised is actually creating a "two tier" system which furthers the risk of abuse.

 

I think trafficking is going to be a problem whatever you do frankly. But if you remove that from the debate entirely and say that is a wider problem and we should tackle the root cause not the effect then to my mind the balance of the remaining arguments are, just about, in favour of some form of decriminalisation. But maybe you have to have some policy interventions on trafficking first before you then move to change the law on sex work as a whole. 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't think it is a like for like comparison. Mainly because the person as a commodity is different to the drug as the commodity. The best case study is Germany where prostitution has, for the most part, always been legal. The financial arguments and the labor rights arguments are borne out by that experience. It does bring in good tax revenues, it does generally lead to sex workers being better protected and having a safer environment in which to work. However, it has not prevented trafficking. In fact the numbers have soared in Germany of women trafficked in order to enter the sex industry over the last decade. Those trafficked women are often controlled by pimps and work a sort of under the radar black market. 

 

It is an interesting debate. A factor that should also be considered is how the internet in recent years has created a new generation of sex worker who operates through these video sites - OnlyFans etc. That is a wild west that governments across the world have struggled to regulate (or even agree whether regulation is appropriate) and it does bring into question whether leaving traditional sex workers criminalised is actually creating a "two tier" system which furthers the risk of abuse.

 

I think trafficking is going to be a problem whatever you do frankly. But if you remove that from the debate entirely and say that is a wider problem and we should tackle the root cause not the effect then to my mind the balance of the remaining arguments are, just about, in favour of some form of decriminalisation. But maybe you have to have some policy interventions on trafficking first before you then move to change the law on sex work as a whole. 

Excellent information, sounds like the need for restrictions on the hiring of recently arrived foreign women in legalized establishments might be in order.

 

 I’m going to guess Canada doesn’t have the high volume of human trafficking that Europe contends with, thus making it two very different starting points of comparison.

 

 Thanks for that knowledgeable response.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/18/2022 at 9:10 PM, 4merper4mer said:

Kraft is a pervert and Watson is a superperv and beyond.  Kraft may not have caused the same harm as Watson but they both behaved inappropriately with women in a similar way.  The resident Pats fan says there is no comparison which is, of course, a joke.

There is very little comparison to what Kraft did versus Watson.

 

 Kraft did it with a willing participant, Watson by all accounts by and large did his activity with unwilling parties.  Unwilling sexual partners is the line you dont cross.............rape.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

There is very little comparison to what Kraft did versus Watson.

 

 Kraft did it with a willing participant, Watson by all accounts by and large did his activity with unwilling parties.  Unwilling sexual partners is the line you dont cross.............rape.

You are right, of course. This thread is turning into an IQ test…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

There is very little comparison to what Kraft did versus Watson.

 

 Kraft did it with a willing participant, Watson by all accounts by and large did his activity with unwilling parties.  Unwilling sexual partners is the line you dont cross.............rape.

A “willing” participant that through their own ingenuity amassed the means and contacts to secure their own departure from a dictatorial communist state and achieve the lifelong dream of servicing fat old billionaires while living in the back of a massage parlor with 20 odd other equally resourceful women who had and achieved the identical lifelong dream?  
 

Shirley.

 

I’m not defending Watson, nor am I claiming that at the moment of the “transaction”  that the circumstances were identical, but the notion that the women in Florida were somehow “free” is beyond ludicrous.  The Kraft/ Watson analogy is not perfect by any means but to pretend that Watson’s group of women were in a horrible situation…..which they seemingly were…..but that Kraft’s were simply willing participants is a joke….and a bad one.  
 

There is no direct evidence that Kraft was involved in what put the women in the circumstances they found themselves in….except for the culmination of it.  That’s the difference.  Lawyering up and pretending not to know about or purposely not learning about the circumstances of these women’s lives is not exactly the pinnacle of valor.  
 

Humor me for a minute…..

 

If the women in the parlor were sent to Florida from China essentially as slaves to perform these acts under threats to either them or their family, how are their circumstances all that different from the circumstances of Watson’s victims?  I see it as two horribly dehumanizing  threats in different forms.  Watson’s threats were immediate while the Florida women had already been coerced into submission.  There is a difference between Kraft and Watson in the sense that Kraft has plausible deniability.  Whoopy do for him.

  • Vomit 1
  • Disagree 1
  • Agree 1
  • Thank you (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said:

A “willing” participant that through their own ingenuity amassed the means and contacts to secure their own departure from a dictatorial communist state and achieve the lifelong dream of servicing fat old billionaires while living in the back of a massage parlor with 20 odd other equally resourceful women who had and achieved the identical lifelong dream?  
 

Shirley.

 

I’m not defending Watson, nor am I claiming that at the moment of the “transaction”  that the circumstances were identical, but the notion that the women in Florida were somehow “free” is beyond ludicrous.  The Kraft/ Watson analogy is not perfect by any means but to pretend that Watson’s group of women were in a horrible situation…..which they seemingly were…..but that Kraft’s were simply willing participants is a joke….and a bad one.  
 

There is no direct evidence that Kraft was involved in what put the women in the circumstances they found themselves in….except for the culmination of it.  That’s the difference.  Lawyering up and pretending not to know about or purposely not learning about the circumstances of these women’s lives is not exactly the pinnacle of valor.  
 

Humor me for a minute…..

 

If the women in the parlor were sent to Florida from China essentially as slaves to perform these acts under threats to either them or their family, how are their circumstances all that different from the circumstances of Watson’s victims?  I see it as two horribly dehumanizing  threats in different forms.  Watson’s threats were immediate while the Florida women had already been coerced into submission.  There is a difference between Kraft and Watson in the sense that Kraft has plausible deniability.  Whoopy do for him.

Good thing you have an open mind and assume that all massage parlor workers are "slaves".

 

Well I got news for you pal, they are NOT all slaves, not all forced into the life.  Certainly some are and that is tragic but to assume they all are is ignorant.  Yes I have meet a few that used to do the massage parlor thing, got enough money and are now more "mainstream".   The assertion made by you that Kraft was human trafficking is wildly presumptive if not racist,  you have little basis for that except you note (constantly hmm) that they are Chinese and serviced kraft.

 

Go to the Philippines or to Thailand , maybe you would realize that not all cultures are the same and not all prostitutes or massage parlor workers are forced into the life.  Am I "forced" to work, I guess I am since I want to eat.  Does that make me a slave, no.

 

 

  • Vomit 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

There is very little comparison to what Kraft did versus Watson.

 

 Kraft did it with a willing participant, Watson by all accounts by and large did his activity with unwilling parties.  Unwilling sexual partners is the line you dont cross.............rape.

I contend that sex trafficked women are not willing hence fit the definition of rape.  

  • Vomit 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TheWeatherMan said:

I contend that sex trafficked women are not willing hence fit the definition of rape.  

You dont know which women are sex trafficked and which aren't. 

 

Simple fact.  Many women at massage parlors aren't sex trafficked.

 

I have volunteered and donated to Elijah Rising in Houston which deals with this issue. I know what am I talking about

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

You dont know which women are sex trafficked and which aren't. 

 

Simple fact.  Many women at massage parlors aren't sex trafficked.

 

I have volunteered and donated to Elijah Rising in Houston which deals with this issue. I know what am I talking about

No offense, I’ll take state.gov guidance on the correlation between human trafficking and prostitution over the BBMB “trust me, I know what im talking about” poster.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TheWeatherMan said:

No offense, I’ll take state.gov guidance on the correlation between human trafficking and prostitution over the BBMB “trust me, I know what im talking about” poster.  

I am not offended, i dont care what you think., it is obvious you have your mind made up.    I have talked with women that formerly did work at massage parlors but you stick by what the govt tells you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, julian said:

The same arguments were made here in Canada against legalization of cannabis, it would create more black mark demand, the exact opposite has occurred. The illegal sales have all but disappeared.

 

Certainly not true in the US.

 

5 hours ago, GunnerBill said:

 

I don't think it is a like for like comparison. Mainly because the person as a commodity is different to the drug as the commodity. The best case study is Germany where prostitution has, for the most part, always been legal. The financial arguments and the labor rights arguments are borne out by that experience. It does bring in good tax revenues, it does generally lead to sex workers being better protected and having a safer environment in which to work. However, it has not prevented trafficking. In fact the numbers have soared in Germany of women trafficked in order to enter the sex industry over the last decade. Those trafficked women are often controlled by pimps and work a sort of under the radar black market. 

 

It is an interesting debate. A factor that should also be considered is how the internet in recent years has created a new generation of sex worker who operates through these video sites - OnlyFans etc. That is a wild west that governments across the world have struggled to regulate (or even agree whether regulation is appropriate) and it does bring into question whether leaving traditional sex workers criminalised is actually creating a "two tier" system which furthers the risk of abuse.

 

I think trafficking is going to be a problem whatever you do frankly. But if you remove that from the debate entirely and say that is a wider problem and we should tackle the root cause not the effect then to my mind the balance of the remaining arguments are, just about, in favour of some form of decriminalisation. But maybe you have to have some policy interventions on trafficking first before you then move to change the law on sex work as a whole. 

 

Trafficking is a massive problem and it is worldwide.  Knowing this, US law enforcement will often conflate trafficking and sex work in order to set up busts.  This is apparently what happened in this Florida case.  A massive trafficking ring was promised,  none was found there and the DA had to walk it all back. The implication is that no person would willingly enter the sex trade unless forced or coerced.

 

Consensual sex trade exists and has advocacy groups such as SWOP that argue for the destigmatizing  and legalization of the trade as a way to reduce violence and abuse of workers. 

  • Like (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Certainly not true in the US.

 

 

Trafficking is a massive problem and it is worldwide.  Knowing this, US law enforcement will often conflate trafficking and sex work in order to set up busts.  This is apparently what happened in this Florida case.  A massive trafficking ring was promised,  none was found there and the DA had to walk it all back. The implication is that no person would willingly enter the sex trade unless forced or coerced.

 

Consensual sex trade exists and has advocacy groups such as SWOP that argue for the destigmatizing  and legalization of the trade as a way to reduce violence and abuse of workers. 

Not sure how legalization of cannabis has effected the price point in those particular states, in southern Ontario legalization has dropped the cost so dramatically that there’s virtually no incentive for illegal sales.

 

hell, in the 80s an ounce of weed was selling between 200-250 dollars . Today I can walk into a store and get an ounce for 80 bucks, and much higher quality I may add.

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

Good thing you have an open mind and assume that all massage parlor workers are "slaves".

 

Well I got news for you pal, they are NOT all slaves, not all forced into the life.  Certainly some are and that is tragic but to assume they all are is ignorant.  Yes I have meet a few that used to do the massage parlor thing, got enough money and are now more "mainstream".   The assertion made by you that Kraft was human trafficking is wildly presumptive if not racist,  you have little basis for that except you note (constantly hmm) that they are Chinese and serviced kraft.

 

Go to the Philippines or to Thailand , maybe you would realize that not all cultures are the same and not all prostitutes or massage parlor workers are forced into the life.  Am I "forced" to work, I guess I am since I want to eat.  Does that make me a slave, no.

 

 

I made no assertion that Kraft was human trafficking.  Stop saying that.  And calling me racist….I’m not sure I even understand that but don’t need you to elaborate with whatever ridiculous equation was going on in your mind on that.

 

Are you aware of how easy or difficult it is to simply pick up and move from China to the United States?   Do you think an average Chinese person just does that with the intent of living in a massage parlor in Florida?  And there are no obstacles from the CCP?  And they don’t speak English?  And they do that all on their own?  And I’m the one ignorant about the realities of the world?  Really?  

33 minutes ago, RoyBatty is alive said:

I am not offended, i dont care what you think., it is obvious you have your mind made up.    I have talked with women that formerly did work at massage parlors but you stick by what the govt tells you.

And this means human trafficking doesn’t exist or didn’t happen in the case of Kraft’s hangout?  And it is not equally obvious that you have your mind made up?  Shirley 

  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Certainly not true in the US.

 

 

Trafficking is a massive problem and it is worldwide.  Knowing this, US law enforcement will often conflate trafficking and sex work in order to set up busts.  This is apparently what happened in this Florida case.  A massive trafficking ring was promised,  none was found there and the DA had to walk it all back. The implication is that no person would willingly enter the sex trade unless forced or coerced.

 

Consensual sex trade exists and has advocacy groups such as SWOP that argue for the destigmatizing  and legalization of the trade as a way to reduce violence and abuse of workers. 

 

Agree trafficking is a bigger issue that is broader than sex work. Decriminalisation of sex work does not reduce the incentive for trafficking because there will always be vulnerable people in poorer countries who are attracted by the opportunities in wealthier countries and as such put themselves in a position where the traffickers can take advantage. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Agree trafficking is a bigger issue that is broader than sex work. Decriminalisation of sex work does not reduce the incentive for trafficking because there will always be vulnerable people in poorer countries who are attracted by the opportunities in wealthier countries and as such put themselves in a position where the traffickers can take advantage. 


Decriminalizing would positively impact  the lives of the consensual workers disproportionately to the trafficked.  However as a trafficked worker, being serially arrested won’t improve your lot.  Trafficked kitchen workers, for instance, don’t face this risk by cooking food free people are willing to pay for. 

  • Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, julian said:

Not sure how legalization of cannabis has effected the price point in those particular states, in southern Ontario legalization has dropped the cost so dramatically that there’s virtually no incentive for illegal sales.

 

hell, in the 80s an ounce of weed was selling between 200-250 dollars . Today I can walk into a store and get an ounce for 80 bucks, and much higher quality I may add.


Black markers are thriving in weed legal states because they price below legal market sellers, whose product is heavily taxed. California, longtime a legal state, black market sales have increased with time.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:


Black markers are thriving in weed legal states because they price below legal market sellers, whose product is heavily taxed. California, longtime a legal state, black market sales have increased with time.  

Ok yeah that makes sense and unfortunate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is OLD. A NEW topic should be started unless there is a very specific reason to revive this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...