How often don’t we see headlines that cry out figures about a gigantic sex trafficking and sex slavery in the world? And they’re always based on “official reports”. As late as 2012, in the American governmental “Trafficking In Persons” (TIP) “report”, it is quoted an “estimate”, made by ILO, that says that about 6.6 million women and girls were sex trafficked in the world in 2005, and that ILO in the 2012 report has “identified a higher percentage of sex trafficking victims, than in the 2005 Report”. It sounds scary, doesn’t it? The very big problem is, however, that none of these figures, or any figure concerning sex trafficking in any UN-, Interpol-, Europol-, EU-, IOM- or whatsoever “report” has the slightest to do with science, reliable investigations or different countries’ authentic statistics around sex trafficking. All these reports are, without any exception, nothing but “guesstimates”; or as Jay Albanese, criminologist at Virginia Commonwealth University, says: “There’s tons of estimates on human trafficking. They’re all crap”. They have nothing whatsoever to do with reality, but are only results of false propaganda, produced to serve the purposes of the abolitionistic agenda.
A very small crime
In reality there are an absolute maximum of about 3000 known cases of sex trafficking in the whole world every year, and since about 10-15 years back (when authorities started to count) they don’t become more or less frequent. It means, that if ILO’s figures should be accurate the 6.6 million female sex trafficked victims 2005 must have been entering prostitution during a period of 2200 years, without anyone of them leaving the profession during their whole, endless lifetime (that is, with a global population as big as ours all that time). And I really doubt that such old sex workers, as nearly 2200, or even 1100 years old, are attractive for anyone – regardless if you believe that people can live for such long time or not, as obviously the “researchers” at ILO do – not even the most fanatic gerontophile.
But the dark figures then, you say, don’t they explain the differences? No, because sex trafficking is, beside terrorism, the most prioritized crime in the world. Only in the US the government alone spends tens of millions of dollars every year, so a found victim costs about 110,000 $ each – to compare with a common non-sexual victim that costs about 150 $. In a small country, like Sweden, the government spends about 2.8 million $ every year, which means that every found victim, forced or freely, costs about 570,000 $. It doesn’t exist any possibility at all that there can be any high “dark figures” in sex trafficking. Probably all, or at least the very big majority of the victims are found, especially as it is common in legalized environments, that costumers react and call for help for forced women, as most of the buyers prefer free sex workers. Even the Swedish BRÅ (Crime preventing counsil) says that there are probably no dark figures (BRÅ rapport 2011:18 s 21).
A fact is also, that almost all scientific investigations – with exception for those which focus only on clinical or street populations, as Melissa Farley does to pretend that all sex workers are forced – show that about 94 % of all sex workers make an own choice to enter prostitution. Professor Thomas M. Steinfatt at Miami University, and his Thai crew, found during 12 years of interviews of more than 4000 bar prostitutes in Thailand none that claimed to have been forced into prostitution, although about 30 % didn’t enjoy their work. That leaves very little room for trafficked women. Australian and New Zeeland investigations have also found, that the indoor sex worker (at least 80 % of all sex workers in the whole world) has greater work satisfaction than the average American! And furthermore not lower mental health than the average woman.
Sex trafficking is not a big criminal activity
Another myth is that sex trafficking is the third biggest criminal activity in the world. Among others both Interpol and Europol has stated this, and that criminal “trafficking-networks” annually earn between 3 and 10 billion dollars. Professor Ann Jordan, American University Washington College of Law, tried to localize the authentic source for the claim and the figure. But it didn’t exist any such source. The claim, and the figure, is nothing but manipulation. Nothing exists that can confirm them. In reality sex trafficking is a very, very small activity, most often involving – when it really occurs – about 1-3 loosely connected persons, and the “sex traffickers” mostly work as any businessman does. They want profit from their invested work and money.
In reality sex trafficking is a “zero crime” (lesser than one case in 100,000 inhabitants). In the whole world, counting from known sex trafficking cases in national statistics, it is at maximum an average of 0.048 cases in 100,000 inhabitants. Comparing some countries we find, that the figure for Sweden, with it’s 0.054 cases in 100,000 inhabitants, is both higher than the world average and higher than Germany (0.051), United Kingdom (0.039), Cambodia (0.027), Thailand (0.025), USA (0.024), Australia and Nepal (0.020), Japan (0.008) and New Zealand (0). So the Swedish government’s claim, that the Swedish sex-purchase-law has minimized sex trafficking, is nothing but a fraud.
The Swedish fraud
When speaking about fraud one must say, that in the subject of prostitution the Swedish government is quite good at it. So for example the so called “evaluation” of the Swedish sex-purchase-law. Inside Sweden it has been heavily criticized for being unscientific and for claiming results which it doesn’t have any grounds for. The same opinion is expressed by an Australian official report, an Italian researcher, Daniela Danna, (2012: Client-only criminalization in the city of Stockholm. A local research on the application of the “Swedish model” of prostitution policy”. In Sexuality Research and Social Policy Journal, vol. 9, n 1, pp 80-93) and by the mentioned professor Ann Jordan, who says: “The reports produced by the Swedish government and other researchers reveal that the government’s claims of success are not supported by facts. There is no evidence that fewer men are purchasing sex, that fewer women are selling sex or that fewer people are being trafficked into forced prostitution.” But this doesn’t stop for example the Swedish minister for EU, Birgitta Olsson, to speak about the success of the Swedish sex-purchase-law, or to quote all fantasy-figures concerning sex trafficking as facts, and that (sex) trafficking is the third biggest criminal activity in the world. And, of course, the Swedish government refuses to comment the critics. It only keeps on pretending the “evaluation” is reliable.
But Birgitta Olsson isn’t more to blame than the Swedish medias. All the biggest papers, and Swedish television, stubbornly refuse to report facts that contradicts the official view of sex trafficking and slavery. And the so called “debate” editorial staffs in all the big papers censor debate texts that contradicts the official view of the gigantic sex trafficking. And an absolute taboo in Swedish media is to speak about the obvious opinion-corruption in the subject which occurs in the Swedish journalist corps. As for example, a Swedish well known program leader, Robert Aschberg, advertised in public that “all opinions” were to be heard in his radio show. But when it came to criticizing the Swedish view of trafficking and prostitution, and the opinion-corruption in media and among journalists, then the advertise statement didn’t matter any longer. As a fact the Swedish journalists, as well-broken dogs, guard the political correctness, without any care whatsoever about the free spoken word within the subject of prostitution and sex trafficking.
Why do they lie?
So why do media/journalists, politicians, NGO’s, radical feminists, abolitionistic and religious activists so unrestrained use false facts, stop critical voices, exaggerate figures, and even lie – at the same time as they aggressively accuse critics for being “embracers of monsters” or supporters of the so called “prostitution lobby” (which also is pure fantasy)? The answer is, that within that circle of people lies the only “trafficking industry” that exists in reality. The subject of sex trafficking and sex slavery in the sex-condemning western society is a very profitable subject for the involved for different reasons. For media/journalists it is about selling single copies, and it portraits them as engaged and compassionate, without them having to do any work. It’s enough to repeat what the official view states and, as parrots, uncritically repeat what the activists and “reports” claim, and then and then hang out some critical person as an “embracer of monsters”. The same goes for the politicians. It makes them look as if they care for “the small” human being, without any need to engage in her at all. As for NGO’s they profit economically. In the position to be able to heavy exaggerate figures they can entice governments and upset people to give them more money. Or as Steven Wagner, earlier at United States Department of Health and Humans Services, said about money given to groups aimed at finding trafficked victims: “Those funds were wasted. Many of the organizations that received grants didn’t really have to do anything. They were available to help victims. There weren’t any victims.” As for radical feminists and activists, they can profit in several ways, but maybe the ideological one is the most important. By scaring people, falsely claiming that millions of women and children are suffering sexually in prostitution, and pretending that the very few worst examples known are representative for all “victims”, they can force repressive and often male hostile laws, rules and agendas on the society – and of course get status and well paid positions for themselves. And anyone who threats these profits and benefits with real facts must be attacked, accused and silenced. So much for their “democratic mind”.
But non of these groups, however, care for all those people who they hurt from the official politics – and they’re a lot more than the “victims”. As for the Swedish sex-purchase-law, “saving” one unwillingly sex worker make indirectly life hard for at least 18 willingly ones. And in USA, during the period of the most intensive paedophile witch hunt, in the 90s, it was 267 unconfirmed cases of accusations to authorities on one confirmed. And most of these 267 falsely accused persons lost their jobs, faced broken families and got their lives devastated, without getting any help from the society – or the “good” activists. And – what’s maybe more important – saving one child victim consequently created as a minimum 267 child victims in hurt families! So don’t try to fancy me that we’re talking about good and compassionate people in the prostitution, sex trafficking or any “rightful” sexually related agenda. Their first and foremost care is about themselves, their economy, ideas, ideology, faith, status and/or well-being. Real compassion – as we see from all the victims they create – has nothing to do with their acting.
An evolutionary adaption
Trading sex is an evolutionary adaption, which means that it is biologically inherited in most primate species, including mankind. But this isn’t to say that all females trade sex for money, but most trade sex in some way; as reward for a service inside or outside marriage, to get a better position in the career, to get support, etc, as the testosterone makes the male easy to fool. To eradicate an evolutionary adaption is impossible. Christianity has tried for 1700 years and failed – and has only succeeded in haunting and terrorizing people. So even if “the good ones” should eradicate, for example, every homosexual in the world today there would be as many in next generation, because it’s biologically inherited. The only thing “righteous” people do, when trying to “correct” the evolution and outlaw evolutionary adaptions, is, as sociologist Howard S. Becker tells us, to make criminals out of people who otherwise don’t show a criminal behaviour. It’s a way for society to produce unnecessarily criminals – and for self appointed “good” people to profit from them instead of doing any productive. And the self appointed “good” activists also stigmatize and make lives a hell for those they condemn as “wrong”. The “good” activist and her allied act today in the same way they did already during the hunt for heretics and “sodomites” in the Middle-age, the witch-hunts from the 15th to the 18th century, the masturbation panic during the 18th and 19th century, etc. The “good” activist, unfortunately, really seems to never die, and almost always she/he is in the frontline of the haters.