Home  Forums |
|
|
|
|
Topic History of: As prostitutes get examined
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
|
hedda |
all I know is the so-called "luxury villa" where Oxfam folk are supposed to have cavorted with prostitutes looked like a right dump.
Amazing how the media can still craft the story and get the right reaction even from sane sensible intelligent people.
# what is never addressed in all these cases especially in Asia and say a place like Thailand..is that prostitution is controlled by local gangsters (that include local Generals, politicians, police etc)who are all powerful and tolerated by local governments. When Western coppers go in all High & Mighty and all they target is any hapless Westerner who may break the law.
They wouldn't dare touch the local Mafias and are in fact warned by them to not breathe a word.
It's why I would never trust any Brit/Oz/US do-gooder copper or ex-copper, many who solicit donations to actually live quite a nice life in Cambodia and get positive media mentions for their "heroics" efforts.
Still wondering if I should expose the Cambodia "charity" set up be ex-Australian and British cops who target Western men who may inadvertently go with a under-age prostitute (who actually work for the "charity" and who have their monthly meetings in one of Phnom Penh's most notorious "girlie" bars which descend into a ..well an Oxfam style "orgy".
I did report them to one of their very high profile Australian super-rich backers who pulled funding and was mortified as she had provided huge amounts of money thinking it would be used to train homeless girls in useful skills in order to get a job.
There needs to be a Royal Commission into all aspects of Charity especially in the UK.. |
|
Randall |
Leaving aside local legalities of prostitution and wider arguments about its moral rectitude, I just think it's a case of fair exchange is no robbery. Presumably these Oxfam workers weren't on duty 24-7 and had some private time. If paying an agreed price for services received in the aftermath of an earthquake amounts to exploitation, then going for a beer or getting a haircut is also exploitative. If it were the case that aid provision was the payment for sex, then that would be a problem, but I haven't read anywhere that that was the situation.
Folks, this hoohah is just another bit of propaganda trying to convince us that affluent, white, middle-class men are the baddies and poor, brown women are the goodies. Apparently sex is some kind of poisonous attack that men do upon women, that the dear flowers could never possibly enjoy and are only acquiescing to under duress or fear of crucifixion (or something). This is nonsense, except in ISIS territory and parts of the third world, about which Oxfam's critics are deafeningly silent. |
|
wyot |
I suppose the crux of it and difference to the nail-clipping profession is the "abuse of trust and position" and hypocrisy, i.e charity workers exploiting the poor and vulnerable they are supposed to be assisting, and are paid to assist. This is why yes it is a "good story". I pass no judgment in this merely highlight what I think you are not addressing...
What I definitly do agree on is that through this escalating furore the subjects of the charities need to be protected from more suffering as a result of the latest "moral panic". |
|
JK2006 |
By the way sources tell me that if media is examining charities they should look more closely at the NSPCC. |
|
JK2006 |
can there be one single person in media who is not aware that, by ratio, there are precisely the same amount of people using hookers in media, government, civil service, medicine, plumbing, customs, teaching, legal, cooking and toe nail cutting as there are in charities? And that any reader, viewer or listener with more than one brain cell is aware that this current "scandal" is simply a way to fill up space with "a good story"? Or that the ramifications will damage innocent people and certainly kill a few? I can put hand on heart and state I have never utilised the services of a prostitute. Not my thing. But many do; many have; since time immemorial. |
|
|
|
