How is Jackie, Somaly Mam, Sabrina Rubin Erdely, and Nicholas Kristof Rape Stories related?

Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times did the same thing with Somaly Mam (even worse) Than Rolling Stone writer Sabrina Rubin Erdely with the Rolling Stone article “A Rape on Campus” at the University of Virginia.

So it is a rape hoax but we are going to behave as if it was true?
“sentence first, verdict afterward.”
UVA should immediately apologize to the men and lift whatever sanctions were placed on them. Afterwards, bring “Jackie” up on whatever criminal charges are appropriate.

The University of Virginia administration, led by President Teresa Sullivan, doesn’t have clean hands in this matter either. They immediately and uncritically swallowed unsubstantiated allegations by an anonymous person in the Rolling Stone story as being true and suspended the activities of ALL fraternities and sororities, not just the fraternity mentioned in the bogus story, as though there was guilt by association. This overreaction resulted in the vandalizing of the Phi Kappa Psi house, threats and vilification of the members to the point they had to move out and find other lodging and trashing of their reputations. When the story was shown to be false, they doubled down and instead of apologizing to the Greek community and lifting the suspension, said that well, even though the story was untrue, in their view there is still a sexual assault problem on campus, and we are going to root it out. Where is the apology for their intemperate and illogical action? Frats and sororities have 3500 members out of a student body of some 20,000. Do they seriously believe that even if there is a “sexual assault problem” at UVA (unproved so far as I can tell) that it rests only in fraternities and not in the general student body or outsiders?  They believe that ALL men are evil and ALL women are innocent angels.

In academia, false claims of rape and harassment are now employed by activists as “tools of social change”

There is a rash of campus activists – most of them (if not all of them) Feminists – now brazenly making false claims of rape and harassment and using them for activism purposes. Most often, these false claims are made as a means to “raise awareness of the problem of rape on campus,” OR “sex trafficking” an interesting notion since if rape were such a big problem on campus there would be no need to make up fake rapes at all.
But sometimes these false claims of harassment/rape are employed as a means to directly leverage power against a man who advocates an idea which a particular Feminist disagrees with. On a similarly disturbing note, there is no evidence that our academic institutions have disciplined the vast majority of these false accusers, even though they have punished other students for far less.

This whole thing played out just months ago with the Somaly Mam scandal:

Somaly Mam and Nicholas Kristof should have lawsuits filed against them for committing fraud and stealing money from the public by providing the public with false sex trafficking horror stories that were lies to send money to the Somaly Mam and Afesip charities. These charities then committed human trafficking themselves by forcing women and girls to stay in their (rescue) centers against their will and to lie about being forced into sex trafficking to the western media and donors.

See this link about Nicholas Kristof and Somaly Mam
Sabrina Rubin Erdely with the Rolling Stone article “A Rape on Campus”

The common problem of male hatred on college campuses

False rape accusations are common

Jackie is a racial feminist who believes ALL men are rapists or future rapists 

Posted in charities, dissertation, domestic violence, essays, Human Trafficking, Jackie, Law, Long Pros, Media, men, Myths, NGO, Nicholas Kristof, Prostitution, Rape, research, research paper, Rolling Stone magazine, Sabrina Rubin Erdely, sex, Sex Slavery, Sex Tourism, Sex Trafficking, Sex Workers, Somaly Mam, statistics, The truth in the Media, thesis, united states of America, University of Virginia, USA, victims | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Somaly Mam’s husband: “I received death threats from Somaly telling me not to speak the truth”

Somaly Mam’s ex-husband (Pierre Legros) and co-founder of AFESIP and the Somaly Mam Foundation: 

“I received death threats from Somaly telling me not to speak the truth”

“When you work in this world, you know fabricated stories are used by everyone to get funding.”

“There were mismanagement and sexual abuse allegations within a Somaly Mam shelter in 2006. To me, this would be the real issue to investigate”

“Nieng is Somaly’s niece. Not our daughter – she was not kidnapped”

Pierre Legros

GlobalPost exclusive:

PHNOM PENH, Cambodia:

Not long ago, this elegant former prostitute was a global celebrity, a putative warrior against sex trafficking in her native Cambodia. She was feted by New York Times human rights columnist Nicholas Kristof and by A-list celebritieslike Oprah Winfrey, Queen Sofia of Spain and actress Susan Sarandon.

She was lionized as a rare beacon of light in a hopeless world.

Last May, an article by Simon Marks in Newsweek devastated her reputation, apparently confirming rumors that Mam used fabricated stories to raise funds for her cause. The article also raises questions about the consistency of her own story and points out confusion over whether she was forced into slavery as a child. In 2012, she admitted that she had made false claims in her speech to the UN General Assembly in which she stated that eight girls were killed after a raid in her Phnom Penh shelter in 2004. Following the Newsweek story, Mam resigned from her foundation in the United States, but did not admit to fabricating stories.

More recently, in a Marie Claire article by Abigail Pesta, Mam has sought to restore her reputation. The article, billed as “Somaly’s Story,” contradicts the Newsweek investigation. Mam insists she did not lie, and that the stories in question were true.

“When you work in this world, you know fabricated stories are used by everyone to get funding.”

~Pierre Legros

Now, in his first interview since the Newsweek article, Mam’s ex-husband Pierre Legros speaks with GlobalPost about the controversy and the alleged fabrications.

Legros co-founded with Mam and another colleague the anti-trafficking organization AFESIP (a French acronym for Agir pour les Femmes en Situation Précaire, loosely translated as Acting for Women in Distressing Situations). He left the organization in 2004, as his marriage was falling apart, and following a controversy after AFESIP and the police raided one of Phnom Penh’s most high-profile hotels.

In Southeast Asia since the late 1980s, Legros first worked as a laboratory manager with Médecins Sans Frontières in UN refugee camps. In 1990, he was a technical adviser in Phnom Penh for the National Malaria Center (CNM). A year after he arrived in the city, he met Mam at Samaky, a popular beer garden. She was one of 30 prostitutes there. They fell in love and created AFESIP in 1995.

The following interview was conducted in French and has been translated, edited and condensed by GlobalPost.

GlobalPost: What do you think of this war of facts between Newsweek and Marie-Claire?

Pierre Legros: It is just more proof of how the media is shaping its own versions of the story and how a communications strategy takes over facts and reality.

I gave some information to Simon Marks [the reporter behind the Newsweek article]. It was proven right and led him to other allegations. He did his job as a journalist and verified the facts.

I have not met Abigail Pesta who wrote the Marie-Claire story and I am a bit more doubtful when it comes to her version, especially related to the kidnapping of our daughter Nieng, which I do not believe to be true. [Editor’s update: Abigail Pesta points out in Marie Claire that Nieng told Pesta she was  kidnapped.]

Anyway, the media must stop this war over a reality they apparently cannot seize. It is going too far and affecting our private lives. These are not fictional people we are speaking about here.

Moreover, I believe Newsweek and Marie Claire are just arguing about a minor problem. I do not understand why journalists are sticking to the fact that Somaly lied about her origins. Who cares?

What we really need to know is, as the director of one of the most well-known NGOs fighting against sexual trafficking, how honestly, fairly and legally did Somaly act? When you are an icon and an NGO director, people expect you to act with utmost probity. From what was published in Spain last year, there were mismanagement and sexual abuse allegations within a shelter in 2006. To me, this would be the real issue to investigate.

According to Somaly Mam, your daughter Nieng was kidnapped in 2006 after school in retaliation for Somaly’s work. Nieng was found by the police in Battambang, about 300 kilometers (180 miles) from Phnom Penh. The Newsweek article disputes this version of the story. Can you tell us exactly what happened?

In reality, Nieng is Somaly’s niece. Not our daughter. I raised and love her as my daughter and she has the same place in my heart as my other kids. This is why I am speaking today. I cannot let her privacy be invaded by media appetite.

[At] that time, Somaly and I were already separated. Nieng called me while she was away and I asked her to call her mother to let her know where she was. She called me for two or three days to give me some news and suddenly stopped. I did not have any news from her after this for a week. I was very worried and I did not know where she was. Somaly called me to let me know that the police found her, intoxicated, with two young men in a bar in Battambang. I remember very well making my way from Siem Reap — where I was living at this time — to Phnom Penh on my motorbike at night, to be there when she came back with Somaly from Battambang.

It was 6:00 a.m. Nieng was at her grandparents’ with Somaly. She could not really understand where she was and she was obviously intoxicated. I wanted to know if there was a chemical substance in her urine to prove whether she had been the victim of a manipulation. I asked Somaly to get some urine samples to know what she took. She never did it and Nieng never had any medical exam after this story, even if AFESIP could provide her with such service. But as our relationship with Somaly was deteriorating and very difficult at that time, I don’t know if there was any investigation opened. I never went to see the police because Somaly was connected to the police and I asked her to take care of this.

The articles are arguing over aspects of Somaly Mam’s childhood, as described in her book. Do you know the truth about it?

Somaly has at least two different versions of her biography. The French version was published in 2005 and is very much biased and doesn’t reflect the reality. For example, [according to that version] she is the only founder of the organization we founded in Cambodia in 1995. We were three who did it. Somaly was going in the brothels to gather information, our friend was helping with administrative requirements and later became the director of our first center in Phnom Penh, and I was looking for funds. We were a team.

The US version of the book is supposedly a translation of the French one. Well, it is absolutely not and the story has been completely rewritten. I am named as a “social worker” in this version. I never was a social worker.

Now, I also have to tell you that I do not know a lot of Somaly’s childhood. I can tell you I know her parents — the ones who are legally named as her parents on her birth certificate. She first introduced me to her father saying he was her uncle. She did the same with Nieng. She told me she was her daughter, while she is the daughter of her older sister. I never took it as a lie. But you know, in Cambodia, the relation to family is different and I think you have to be here to understand it.

And you can see she speaks of her “daughters” when speaking about the girls who are now in the center. So, I am not surprised to see there are some inconsistencies in her story.

When you all co-founded AFESIP, what was your fundraising strategy?

There was no policy. We had the idea to start an organization because in the early 1990s, prostitution, trafficking, HIV and drugs were all linked. Somaly was touched by the girls she would see and interview in brothels. But she would not be happy knowing the girls would stay there in miserable conditions, often close to sex slavery. So she would bring them to our own house.

Nieng and Adana, our two little daughters, were at home at that time. Setting up an organization was a great solution to help us create a center for the victims and raise our children in a safer environment. In this context, none of us had ever headed an organization, and communications were not part of the problem yet.

I wanted to draw a lot of attention to get funds from international institutions. Somaly is beautiful, sexy, charismatic and determined. Every NGO dreams of having its Somaly, and every media wants her on camera. We soon became very much high profile and we welcomed a lot of journalists. They all wanted to make something sexy, to draw attention and mark everyone’s mind.

For example, CNN and CNBC have been very pushy and wanted to show extraordinary stories. At that time, as an international director for AFESIP, I did not have the time to manage the media. But media was bringing visibility, which means funding in the NGO world. Why are celebrities today fulfilling the role of “ambassadors” for NGOs and international organizations and institutions?

It is only in the early 2000s that we put together a strategy to select journalists — because we were harassed by the media and could not control Somaly’s and AFESIP’s images, and even more importantly, protect the victims. Once, I had CNN and BBC at the same time in my office!

Journalists were furious when they had to sign a paper saying I would review everything before it was published. None of them did send me anything of course, and a lot of false stories came out, based on misunderstandings or the will to report about something extraordinary. Faces were shown, testimonies were wrong. The media just betrayed us for sensationalism and efficiency of information.

We started to have complaints from UNICEF and other child protection [agencies] accusing us of going too far and not protecting the children. From there, I refused a lot of reports and accepted only “big media,” to have a massive audience.

But to me, a real testimony is done by the police. Not by a journalist.

Out of all the “lies” Somaly is accused of, can you tell us today if victims of trafficking were still helped or if the whole operation is a fraud?

When I was at AFESIP, there were different types of victims. Some of them were victims of trafficking, others were referred to us by other NGOs or the police as “prevention cases” — meaning that they could be susceptible to trafficking. We host them all in our centers in Phnom Penh, Siem Reap and Kompong Cham.

A lot of them were coming from Vietnam. I cannot count how many girls were helped but I brought [some of] them back home to Vietnam myself. This is also the reason why we created a whole AFESIP network in the region. Our goal was to rescue the victims, host them in AFESIP centers in Cambodia and then bring them back home to host them in our AFESIP centers in their country of origin to ensure they could learn a job and reinsert themselves in the society.

But this all changed when I was forced to resign in 2004, for the Cambodian organization took full power over the regional offices that led them to split with AFESIP.

Why were you forced to leave the organization?

First, our marriage was falling apart. I felt I could not work with Somaly anymore. Then, the Cambodian organization that Somaly was directing became very aggressive with the international offices and wanted to take over the power. There was some kind of a “revolution” that led Cambodian and foreign staff to split. In 2004, the organization actually had money and could sustain itself. I understood quickly that Somaly wanted to have this money and would show me my way out. She did not need us anymore. I felt it was some sort of a “decolonization” war within AFESIP. We were not welcome anymore and could not work together.

There was also a raid led by Somaly and the police on the Chai Hour 2 hotel, a very high-profile hotel, known to be a place of prostitution but not necessarily of sex trafficking. This raid was very much reported in the media — and first done for a French TV [station] to be able to film it and make the headlines.

But Somaly and I, as well as our children, were in danger after this intervention.

It actually became a diplomatic incident between the US and Cambodia, because the US State Department protected us and was therefore fighting against some of the high-ranking politicians threatening us. It had to, since we would be awarded a year after with its anti-trafficking award. When the US Embassy learned about the raid, they called me straight away to let me know the US would protect us. I was, however, warned that I had to stop or we would be killed despite the embassy’s protection. It went too far. This is also part of the reasons why I resigned.

Why are you speaking out?

I kept silent so far because I do not really think this debate over Somaly’s lies is of interest. When you work in this world, you know fabricated stories are used by everyone to get funding. But I received death threats from Somaly and her entourage, telling me not to speak. I do it for my children, for the truth to be restored and to denounce the logic of a failing system praising “development.”

Article Link:

Posted in Asia, attorney general, Cambodia, charities, dissertation, essays, Human Trafficking, India, Law, Long Pros, Media, Nepal, NGO, Nicholas Kristof, Philippines, Phnom Penh, proposition35, Prostitution, Rape, research, research paper, sex, Sex Slavery, Sex Tourism, Sex Trafficking, Sex Workers, Somaly Mam, statistics, Super Bowl, Thailand, THE TRUTH ABOUT SEX TRAFFICKING, SEX SLAVERY, PROSTITUTION, SEX WORKERS, HUMAN TRAFFICKING, FORCED PAID SEX, SEX SLAVES, HOOKERS, PIMPS, PIMPING, BROTHELS, JOHNS, SEX FOR MONEY, CALL GIRLS, SEX WORK,, The truth in the Media, thesis, united states of America, victims | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Somaly Mam, Nicholas Kristof and the Sex Trafficking Media empire

Somaly Mam and  Nicholas Kristof  should have lawsuits filed against them for committing fraud and stealing money from the public by providing the public with false sex trafficking horror stories that were lies to send money to the Somaly Mam and Afesip charities.  These charities then committed human trafficking themselves by forcing women and girls to stay in their (rescue) centers against their will and to lie about being forced into sex trafficking to the western media and donors. 

When it comes to Sex trafficking the only people the media speak with are the anti-sex trafficking organizations or zealous politicians and no one else.  This is a biased one-sided conversation.  The media will never question, check or research any of the claims that these groups make. Always taking their word for it and never once researching or questioning their statistics or anything they say.  This results in misleading and false reporting by the media, news organizations and the government.

Prostitutes are NOT forced! They do sex work of their own free will. They keep the money they make.  When a Anti-sex trafficking group states that millions of underage children are raped, forced, and kidnapped against their will into prostitution by evil men -Why doesn’t the reporter ask: What makes you think that? Where is the proof, and evidence?, can you prove it? Or do you just think that? Can you prove they are forced against their will, raped, kidnapped and beaten? Or do you just think and assume that? Can you prove that they were underage?  Or do you just think they “look” young because they are short or petite and skinny?   What makes you think that were raped? Can you prove it? Or do you just “think” that. Where did you get those stats on the number of forced victims? What are your sources? Where did your source come up with that information? What was the methodology? How do you know the numbers are accurate? Are all prostitutes little baby girls? Or are some of them transgender, boys or men?  Are some of them willing Adults? The media, NGO’s and government officials will never admit this or ask the sex workers rights groups or prostitutes themselves about the sex industry.   It appears that the media are biased towards lies about exaggerated sex trafficking. Why is that?  Maybe we should ask that question to the media?

Somaly Mam Resigns after she was caught lying about Sex Trafficking.

Here is Somaly Mam lying to Michelle Obama about non-existent fake made-up sex trafficking victims:

Most Children in Orphanages in Cambodia and Asia have loving, living parents who are deceived into giving their children to the orphanages. They are NOT sex trafficking victims! Human Trafficking charities are committing fraud inventing and abusing fake victims! Keeping them against their will in Orphanages.  petition to fire Nicholas Kristof from the New York Times

Cartoon drawing explaining the Somaly Mam Fraud 

Posted in Asia, Brothels, Cambodia, charities, essays, Human Trafficking, Long Pros, Media, Nicholas Kristof, Philippines, proposition35, Prostitution, sex, Sex Slavery, Sex Tourism, Sex Trafficking, Sex Workers, Somaly Mam, statistics, Thailand, THE TRUTH ABOUT SEX TRAFFICKING, SEX SLAVERY, PROSTITUTION, SEX WORKERS, HUMAN TRAFFICKING, FORCED PAID SEX, SEX SLAVES, HOOKERS, PIMPS, PIMPING, BROTHELS, JOHNS, SEX FOR MONEY, CALL GIRLS, SEX WORK,, The truth in the Media, thesis, united states of America, USA, victims | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

US foreign policy with Sex Trafficking is based on lies, exaggeration

This week the USA’s Trafficking in persons (TIP) report came out with Secretary of State John Kerry releasing it.

There is only one problem with it. – It is based on lies, exaggeration, myths and emotional made up stories.

“Is anyone talking about the huge influence Somaly Mam, Nicholas Kristof and Chong Kim may have had on US foreign policy with Sex Trafficking? Every year the TIP report demands countries find victims and traffickers but what if the constant demand to find more and more is based on this media distortion and they really aren’t there to find. American citizens and Congress are all deceived over what may be a faux-issue. Articles I read say this woman is not the only one who has exaggerated, but is the one seen with President Obama and Hillary Clinton when she was Sec State. With John Kerry, Michelle Obama, and with The Queen of Spain. For me this is the real issue. The TIP program is no more than Modern Day Imperialism. What has happened to that old concept of national sovereignty?”

-John Kane – Bangkok Post

Somaly Mam and Chong Kim were caught lying about Sex Trafficking

Somaly Mam, the celebrated Cambodian anti-sex-trafficking activist who, according to a recentNewsweek expose, fabricated her entire life story and those of the alleged victims she advocated for. The revelations have disillusioned many of Mam’s loyal supporters and left the press looking gullible. Just as importantly, they’ve highlighted the public’s seemingly insatiable desire for heroic narratives—and the willingness of many in the media to trick the public and provide them even if they are fake.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s TIP report:

The United States government is forcing  people to lie about being sex trafficking victims  because they can’t find enough real victims!

(John Kerry, President Obama, Hillary Clinton and the USA government are forcing people to lie about being sex trafficking victims – if they don’t lie they are put in jail or deported using the TIPS report) 

“Today we will hear about Thailand’s Tier in America’s Trafficking in Persons (TIP) report. Never forget the TIP report is also a programme. America makes demands under TIP and countries, including Thailand, ignore their own sovereignty, and comply. TIP demands that countries change laws, speed up justice (a conflicting thought), and set aside special treatment for one class of victims that the US can never find enough of. Every TIP report whines about the need to find more victims and prosecute more traffickers and then throw away the key. But the Somaly Mam expose in the Bangkok Post on June 1 and around the world has shown us that this issue has suffered extreme exaggeration by those who need funding and by media who benefit from sensational stories. Read a few blogs about trafficking and you too will quickly learn that “facts” about trafficking often defy common sense.

Every resident of Thailand, Thai and foreigner , should read TIP reports and see what they are really about. On page 4 of the 2013 TIP report the United States offers Taiwan as an example for other countries to follow. TIP tells us Taiwan has detention centres at its borders to hold new arrivals until they can be investigated as possible trafficking victims. Detainees are offered long-term immigration status (a kind of bribe) and release from detention in exchange for agreeing to claim to be victims and turn on people who helped them get a job in Taiwan. I am shocked, even scared, that my country (USA) encourages this.”

-John Kane
Bangkok Post

For more details about this follow this Link: from this same site

Here is another good link about this
 from understanding sex trafficking website

Petition to get Nicholas Kristof fired from the New York Times for lying about sex trafficking:

State Department Trafficking in Persons Report: A need for more evidence and U.S. accountability, by Ann Jordan


On June 28, the State Department released its annual Trafficking in Persons Report (TIP Report). While the TIP Report contains many important observations, reflections and recommendations, it falls short on at least the following three counts.

1. It fails to meet the standard set by President Obama for evidence-based policy making.

2. It offers insufficient discussion of the critical issue of ‘root causes’ or ‘factors making people vulnerable to trafficking’.

3. It fails to acknowledge U.S. accountability for the trafficking of workers by U.S. government contractors and, instead, lays much of the blame at the doorsteps of governments in developing countries.

These three shortcomings raise serious concerns about the approach being promoted by the State Department in this TIP Report and in its diplomatic efforts and funding decisions.

Failure to engage in evidence-based policy making.

The myth of the so-called Swedish model: The TIP Report states that “[s]ome [people] work to combat root causes – to end the demand for commercial sexual exploitation” (p. 15) without any discussion or evidence.  The TIP Report does not name the “root cause” being addressed but it seems to assume that ‘demand’ for paid sex is THE cause for women selling sex (instead of, say, poverty or lack of other options?). Nonetheless, it promotes the myth – or at least the unproven strategy – that arresting clients will stop prostitution and also stop trafficking into prostitution.  Despite numerous claims from supporters of the so-called Swedish model (in which clients are prosecuted and sex workers are not), there is no objective, methodologically sound, replicable research demonstrating that the Swedish law is responsible for any changes in the incidence of prostitution or trafficking in Sweden.  In fact, the Swedish government reports admit quite frankly that important data is missing and that the government cannot draw clear conclusions or cause-effect relationships:

  • The Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare concluded that “[w]e cannot give any unambiguous answer to [the question of whether prostitution has increased or decreased].  At most, we can discern that street prostitution is slowly returning, after swiftly disappearing in the wake of the law” (p. 33). The Board concluded that “[n]o causal connections can be proven between legislation and changes in prostitution” (p. 46).
  • 2010 report also admits that “it is difficult to determine whether changes in prostitution are a result of the ban or of other measures or circumstances.  It is also difficult to know with any certainty how prostitution and trafficking might have changed if there had been no ban [on the purchase of sex]” (Swedish Institute 2010, p. 35).

It is particularly problematic that the State Department has adopted a legal strategy without first engaging in ANY serious discussion or analysis of the consequences of the approach.  The TIP Report does not present any evidence linking the criminalization of clients directly to a change in the behavior of adults who sell sex.  It does not even identify the root causes of prostitution or attempt to link those root causes to the ‘end demand’ approach. The State Department should ask and objectively answer the question of how arresting clients would impact adults who are selling sex in countries with different economic and social structures and economies.  Would it cause all sex workers to stop selling sex (which is the goal of the Swedish model) and lead sex workers to find another way to make a living? Perhaps they would go to law school or open a business or sell food on the street?  Or, perhaps they would be forced to live on the street without any income.

What alternatives are there for the millions of adults selling sex around the world?  If they have very few or no alternatives, will they continue in sex work but be forced to work more clandestinely to protect their clients from arrest?  Would the law simply turn out to be another opportunity for the police to shake down street-based sex workers and their clients?  The TIP Report fails to ask or answer any of these questions.

It also fails to consider whether governments offer sufficient support to help people transition to other livelihoods. Would India have enough resources to help millions of women survive without selling sex? Even the U.S. has never made a serious commitment to provide the millions of dollars needed to support programs to assist sex workers in the U.S. who want to transition to other work and to prevent runaway youth from turning to prostitution to survive.

Since the State Department has not engaged in any serious critical enquiry along the above lines (at least not publicly) and, more importantly, has not produced any evidence in support of its belief in the ‘end demand’ approach, it should cease from promoting this ‘one size fits all’ myth.

Unproven ‘prevention’ practice. The TIP Report also argues that “[p]ublic awareness of human trafficking – including awareness of warning signs and required responses – is critical and must be ongoing.” (p. 18).  However, I am not aware of any research demonstrating that public awareness campaigns (including those funded by the U.S.) are effective in preventing people from deciding to migrate for work.  While campaigns might have a temporary role in raising awareness and causing people to think twice about migrating, this only lasts for the duration of the (typically brief) campaign. Since people are usually trafficked by someone they know, they ignore ‘warning signs’ and if they need to migrate for work, they may be willing to take risks despite warning signs. This is not to say that some campaigns might not actually work briefly.  There simply is no evidence on which ones work and which ones waste money. Why, then, is the State Department still promoting these campaigns?  The U.S. should not be promoting or funding campaigns until there is real evidence of the impact (or lack of impact).

It should be apparent by now that I strongly support more critical thinking and independent evidence so that we can develop a body of research around the question of what works and what does not work. I had hoped that the President Obama’s call for more evidence on the actual impact of U.S.-funded programs would work its way into the State Department’s Trafficking Office but, to date, I have been disappointed.  True, the Trafficking Office is calling for more impact evaluations of its grant-funded programs, which is excellent news.  But this is not enough.  It needs to ensure that its own statements, recommendations, and observations in speeches, reports and other materials are based on objective, replicable evidence and, if none is available, to say so.

Ideas are the seed from which good projects develop but evidence is better.  As Daniel Patrick Moynihan observed:  “everyone is entitle to his (or her) own opinion but not his (or her) own set of facts.”  Right now, the State Department is disseminating too many opinions; it needs more facts.

Lack of sufficient focus on root causes or the factors making people vulnerable to trafficking

The TIP Report makes important contributions to the discussion of the plight of workers in the global supply chain as well as workers hired by government subcontractors.  However, the TIP Report continues to omit any meaningful discussion about the conditions in countries of origin and destination that render people vulnerable to forced labor.  For example, the TIP Report does not mention the impact of restrictive labor migration policies on migrant workers, the need for research to identify and develop targeted assistance to vulnerable populations or how the failure of many governments to protect basic rights fuels outmigration.

The TIP Report does make one interesting proposal about how to solve the problem of excessive debt owed by migrant workers to labor brokers for overseas jobs. It argues that governments in countries of origin “could provide small-scale loans to cover travel costs and protect workers’ rights while they are abroad” (p. 24).  However, since the majority of migrants are unable to obtain visas to work abroad legally, is the State Department seriously asking governments to assist citizens with financial support to migrate to the U.S., even without proper documents?  This would be a useful alternative to borrowing from a potential trafficker but it still ignores the basic question of how to prevent the vulnerability of undocumented migrant workers en route and in their U.S. destination.

Silence on issue of U.S. accountability for the plight of contract workers

The TIP Report faults governments in the developing world that “encourage labor migration as a means of fueling foreign exchange remittances, yet they do not adequately control private recruiters who exploit migrants and make them vulnerable to trafficking” (p. 18).  However, the U.S. government should not be so quick to lay the blame at the door of governments in the developing world as long as the U.S. does not have a good record itself on the recruitment of its own foreign laborers.  The New Yorker Magazine recently published a damning report of an investigation into the recruitment of foreign workers into Iraq and Afghanistan by U.S. subcontractors.  Reporter Sarah Stillman’s article “The Invisible Army: For foreign workers on U.S. bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, war can be hell” reveals a total lack of accountability on the part of the U.S. government for the conditions under which contractors recruit, hire and treat foreign workers working for the U.S. in Iraq and Afghanistan:

  • Workers are told they are going to work in one country and not told until arrival that they are going to Iraq or Afghanistan (Note:  this is not a new technique as Cam Simpson reported in a series of articlesin the Chicago Times in 2005 on the plight of Nepalese workers recruited by contractors to work in Jordan but ending up in Iraq).
  • Promised salaries are not paid – “they were to earn as little as two hundred and seventy-five dollars a month…a fraction of what they’d been promised.”  And, instead of the $1538 a month promised, workers earned $350.
  • Accommodation is “soiled mattresses with twenty-five other migrants.”
  • Contracts require 12 hour working days, 7 days a week.
  • A subcontractor accused of human trafficking violations continues to receive U.S. contracts.

The report continues with extensive documentation of abuses, lack of oversight and ongoing contracts to dodgy contractors. This outsourcing of labor continues and yet the government takes little responsibility for what happens with the workers who support U.S. service members in these two militarized zones:  “A spokesman for U.S. Central Command [in Iraq] acknowledged that it “does not play a formal role in the monitoring of living conditions on U.S. bases,” although each base has a military chain of command responsible for “working with the entities involved to insure minimum standards are met.”

Obviously, the State Department’s accusations against some other governments certainly has merit, but it is not made with ‘clean hands.’  The U.S. government (and other governments of countries of destination) is also liable for the same failures because it does not ensure the workers who are hired to work for the U.S. government by subcontractors are treated fairly and equitably according to U.S. labor standards.

Just as manufacturers who sell products produced through a chain of contractors are now being called upon to be responsible for the situation of workers along the chain, the U.S. government must also ensure that the workers who are hired by subcontractors to work for Americans are provided with the same rights and protections as other workers in the U.S. The trafficking of migrant workers by government contractors will not end until governments in countries of origin and destination coordinate their efforts and, most importantly, until governments, such as the U.S., that use contractors to hire workers for government-related jobs, monitor and control the activities of the contractors, establish safe mechanisms to report on worker abuse and punish violations through criminal prosecutions and contract terminations.

Thus, the U.S. government should follow its own recommendations to other governments:

  • “require that government contractors and subcontractors ensure that employees are not hired or recruited through fraudulent means or the use of excessive fees. Such policies would increase transparency and make it more difficult for unscrupulous labor brokers to use debt bondage as a means of providing cheap labor for government contracts. This is particularly important for third-country nationals, who are often imported for large construction projects and who are more susceptible to exploitation due to distance and isolation, language barriers, and dependence on the employer for visas or work permits, among other factors” (p. 19).

Hopefully, next year’s TIP Report will present more evidence-based information and models for prevention as well as information about the concrete steps the U.S. has taken to ensure that the government is protecting the rights of migrant workers hired by U.S. subcontractors and punishing the criminals responsible for the abuse, exploitation and forced labor of those workers.

Ann Jordan is the Director of the Program on Human Trafficking and Forced Labor at the Center for Human Rights and Humanitarian Law, American University Washington College of Law.

Here are some research links:

Posted in Asia, attorney general, Brothels, Cailfornia, charities, Denver, essays, Human Trafficking, Law, Long Pros, Myths, New York, Nicholas Kristof, Philippines, Phnom Penh, proposition35, Prostitution, Rape, research, research paper, sex, Sex Slavery, Sex Tourism, Sex Trafficking, Sex Workers, Somaly Mam, statistics, THE TRUTH ABOUT SEX TRAFFICKING, SEX SLAVERY, PROSTITUTION, SEX WORKERS, HUMAN TRAFFICKING, FORCED PAID SEX, SEX SLAVES, HOOKERS, PIMPS, PIMPING, BROTHELS, JOHNS, SEX FOR MONEY, CALL GIRLS, SEX WORK,, The truth in the Media, thesis, united states of America, USA, victims | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Chong Kim of the film Eden is a Sex Trafficking Fraud

Chong Kim, the Woman Whose Allegedly True Story Served as the Basis for Megan Griffith’s Film Eden, Denounced as a Fraud

posted by  on WED, JUN 4, 2014

Eden is the sex-trafficking drama allegedly based on the real-life story of Chong Kim. The film earned Seattle filmmaker Megan Griffiths the 2012 Genius Award in Film. (Here’s further gushing from me about Griffith’s gripping film.)

Today brought this Facebook update from the nonprofit organization Breaking Out (bolds mine):

To all our loyal followers,

We regretfully want to inform everyone the results of a year long investigation by our highly experienced investigative unit, thatChong Kim whom has claimed to be a survivor of human trafficking is not what she claims to be.

After thorough investigation into her story, people, records and places, as well as, many interviews with producers,publishers and people from organizations, we found no truth to her story. In fact, we found a lot of fraud, lies, and most horrifically capitalizing and making money on an issue where so many people are suffering from.

We have found several other organizations, other than ours, who have been defrauded by Chong collecting money in their name, using their 501 c3 status for her benefit while none of these organizations have seen a dime. I ask if anyone has sent money or goods to Chong Kim for another organization to please contact us as we are leading the legal pursuit of the issue.

Through our investigation we have found many other good non-profits who were afraid to speak out for fear of backlash. Well, we at Breaking Out, while expecting her loyal followers to give us backlash, we have collected the facts and evidence to prove our claims. We are ready with others supporting us to take full legal action against Chong Kim.

While like many others, we at Breaking Out continue our dire work to help the victims of Human Trafficking. We do so with limited funding and we believe the despicable acts by Chong Kim is hindering and re-victimizing legit human trafficking victims. This is why she and others like her need to be stopped.

If anyone has donated any money to Chong Kim under Breaking Out or any other organization or if you have any other questions about this matter please feel free to contact us.

Here’s what director Megan Griffiths said about the allegations just now on Twitter:


Article link is below:
Posted in Asia, charities, dissertation, essays, Human Trafficking, Law, movie, Nicholas Kristof, Philippines, Phnom Penh, proposition35, Prostitution, Rape, research, research paper, sex, Sex Slavery, Sex Tourism, Sex Trafficking, Sex Workers, Somaly Mam, statistics, Taken, THE TRUTH ABOUT SEX TRAFFICKING, SEX SLAVERY, PROSTITUTION, SEX WORKERS, HUMAN TRAFFICKING, FORCED PAID SEX, SEX SLAVES, HOOKERS, PIMPS, PIMPING, BROTHELS, JOHNS, SEX FOR MONEY, CALL GIRLS, SEX WORK,, The truth in the Media, thesis, united states of America, USA, victims | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

How common is forced sex trafficking in Cambodia?

How common is forced sex trafficking?
Are all prostitutes sex trafficking victims?
What is the difference between a prostitute and a sex trafficking victim?
How bad is sex trafficking in Cambodia?

The downfall of anti-sex-slavery activist Somaly Mam has led some to question the extent of trafficking.

 Phnom Penh, Cambodia – In early 2011, Srey Mao, 28, and two friends were “rescued” and taken to a shelter run by Afesip, a Cambodian organisation that prides itself on helping sex-trafficking victims recover from trauma while learning new trades such as sewing and hairdressing.

There was just one problem: The women claim they hadn’t actually been trafficked.

Instead, the women said they were willing sex workers who had been rounded up off the street during a police raid and sent to Afesip, headed by the internationally renowned anti-sex-slavery crusader Somaly Mam with funding from the foundation that bears her name.

They said they were confined there for months as purported victims of sex trafficking. Srey Mao claimed that she, her friends and a number of other sex workers in the centre were instructed by a woman to tell foreign visitors they had been trafficked.

“I was confined against my will,” Srey Mao said on Saturday.

The person she said instructed ordered her and others to lie was Somaly Mam.

Falling star

For the better part of a decade, Mam has been the celebrated face of anti-human trafficking efforts in Cambodia.

With her undeniable charisma and tragic back-story as a former child sex slave, she has rubbed shoulders and traded hugs with Hollywood stars such as Susan Sarandon and Meg Ryan. CNN dubbed her a “hero” in 2007. Glamour Magazine made her a “woman of the year” honoree in 2006.

In 2010, then-US secretary of state Hillary Clinton visited an Afesip shelter here and later spoke about her moving encounter with Long Pros, a former sex slave who said her eye was gouged out by a brothel-keeper. New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, one of Mam’s strongest supporters, wrote about Pros and his “hero” Mam.

Mam’s star-studded image abruptly lost its sheen on May 28, when she was forced to resign from the Somaly Mam Foundation following a Newsweek cover story reporting that she had lied about her past.

Not only had Mam not been an orphaned trafficking victim – reporter Simon Marks revealed in Newsweek that she grew up with both parents and graduated from high school – but she reportedly encouraged and coached girls to lie as well.

One of these girls was Pros, who, according to Newsweek, actually lost her eye to a tumor and was sent to Afesip for vocational training. The same was reportedly true of Meas Ratha, a teenager allegedly coached by Mam to say she had been trafficked when in fact she was sent to Afesip by an impoverished farming family, desperate to give their daughter a better start in life.

Afesip representatives did not respond to requests to comment for this story.

‘Lies, damned lies, and statistics’

Although the stories of Mam, Pros and Ratha have now been widely scrutinised in the media, less examined have been Mam’s frequent embellished statements about the scale and nature of sex trafficking in Cambodia.

The term “trafficking” has become trendy among donors in the Western world for the pure horror it evokes – a horror that Pros embodied for many – but it leaves out a whole spectrum of complex choices and negotiations, and often erases women’s agency entirely.

Sebastien Marot, founder of the nongovernmental organisation Friends International, which works with street children and other vulnerable populations, has lived in Cambodia since 1994. In all his years in the country, he said he has encountered only a handful of what he considers clear-cut cases of sex slavery, despite the lavish funding and massive attention from celebrities that the cause attracts.

“There’s definitely fashions in the donor world,” he said. “The big thing now is trafficking – people say, ‘Oh my God, trafficking’ – but how do we define that?”

Mam and her foundation have interpreted the term liberally, claiming repeatedly, along with Afesip, that sex slaves in Cambodia number in the tens of thousands.

In 2011, Mam told an interviewer that there were 80,000 to 100,000 prostitutes in Cambodia, 58 percent of whom were trafficked. In a 2010 Somaly Mam Foundation video, Hollywood actress Lucy Liu solemnly intoned in a voiceover that “the low-end estimate for the number of sex slaves in Cambodia alone is over 40,000”. Mam has also claimed that it is commonplace for children as young as 3 to be sold into sex slavery in Cambodia.

The source for these numbers is unclear, and according to some, wrong.

study published in 2011 by the UN Inter-Agency Project on Trafficking based on data collected in 2008 stated that the number of sex trafficking victims in Cambodia is 1,058 at most, including 127 children, six of whom were under the age of 13. The majority of these cases involved women who had fallen into debt to their brothels, or prostitutes under the age of 18. These are both abhorrent and illegal, but they are a far cry from the extreme scenarios Mam often invoked – girls put in cages, tortured with electricity, having their eyes gouged out by pimps.

“We never encountered any such thing, and we certainly looked for it,” the study’s author, Thomas Steinfatt, said this week. “We couldn’t find any instances of that … In terms of people tortured, I think they’ve been watching too many movies.”

Steinfatt, a professor at the University of Miami, said the figure of 1,058 is still an accurate estimate of the number of sex trafficking victims in the country. Although he has been criticised by some anti-sex-slavery activists for producing such a low figure, he is the only researcher to have systematically canvassed Cambodia seeking out brothels and collecting data on the women and girls inside.

“Sex trafficking is actually one of the smaller portions of trafficking,” he said. “Much more [trafficking] goes on in labour or domestic work. It’s quite literally the ‘sexiest’ topic, and it’s something that really bothers people – which it should, but it’s not the largest.”

Helen Sworn, the founder of anti-trafficking coalition Chab Dai, noted that other researchers have disputed Steinfatt’s findings and methodology, though added that Steinfatt’s estimate “was the best available number” before laws introduced in 2008 and 2009 that caused “a significant shift underground of incidents, which was not addressed in the previous research”. However, Sworn said Mam’s resignation should be an impetus for soul-searching from NGOs on how to proceed in the future.

“Of course this will have repercussions on the sector, which is why we need to be intentional and professional in the way we implement programs,” she said. “Funding has always been a challenge for those who don’t exploit the dignity of others, so maybe this just makes for a more democratic platform where it will be equally challenging.”

Mam’s embellishments have also distracted attention from the very serious problems Cambodia still faces, including the structural reasons why 1,058 women and girls might be forced into prostitution and why sex work is often seen as the best job available.

‘Victim’ or ‘prostitute’?

“Abolitionist” NGOs such as Afesip take the position that sex work is by definition coercive, and that it is impossible to choose to be a prostitute. In a 2008 interview with the Phnom Penh Post, Mam noted that she preferred to use the term “victim” rather than “prostitute”, and that women who thought they were voluntary sex workers could actually be sex slaves.

In 2006, in response to complaints by sex workers that they did not like being sent to NGO-run shelters after police raids, Afesip advisor Aarti Kapoor told The Cambodia Daily, “We don’t believe prostitution is a legitimate form of work”. This led Afesip to support a draconian anti-human trafficking law, which was passed by Cambodia’s parliament in 2008 and, some advocates claim, ramped up police abuses against sex workers like Srey Mao.

Srey Mao said she became a prostitute because she believed it was the best option to support her aging parents and young daughter. Months in the Afesip shelter did not change her mind. She claims that after she arrived at the shelter, she was not given access to anti-retroviral drugs for five days or allowed to see her family. Instead, she was enrolled in a yearlong sewing course, entailing eight hours a day of study or garment work.

“I was not happy to be there … Very often, during our short break for lunch, Afesip staff and sometimes Mam Somaly came to us and told us to tell donors and foreigners who would come to visit shelters that we were victims of human trafficking.”

Seven months into her stay at the shelter, Srey Mao ran away and returned to life as a prostitute.


Posted in Asia, Brothels, Cambodia, charities, dissertation, Human Trafficking, Law, Long Pros, Nicholas Kristof, Philippines, Phnom Penh, proposition35, Prostitution, Rape, research, research paper, sex, Sex Slavery, Sex Tourism, Sex Trafficking, Sex Workers, Somaly Mam, statistics, Taken, THE TRUTH ABOUT SEX TRAFFICKING, SEX SLAVERY, PROSTITUTION, SEX WORKERS, HUMAN TRAFFICKING, FORCED PAID SEX, SEX SLAVES, HOOKERS, PIMPS, PIMPING, BROTHELS, JOHNS, SEX FOR MONEY, CALL GIRLS, SEX WORK,, The truth in the Media, thesis, victims | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Rescuing sex trafficking victims is the worst form of abuse

Rescuing sex workers from themselves is the worst form of abuse

Somaly Mam’s loose relationship with the truth has ultimately hurt rather than helped Cambodian sex workers. After Cambodia was placed on a State Department watch list in 2008 (thanks to some degree to Mam’s advocacy work), brutal raids and “rescue operations” were carried out by the State. According to a Human Rights Watch report, rather than rescued, sex workers were abused, beat with sticks, fists, and even electric shock batons (at least two were reported to have been beaten to death), extorted and frequently raped at the hands of authorities during rescue operations with the police and in detention centers.

Nicholas Kristof still continues to lie about sex trafficking – and always will. 



by ali heller

In 2009, New York Time’s Nicholas Kristof told the story of Long Pross, a young girl forced into prostitution whose tortured, abused, and mutilated body bore witness to the deep scars left by the predatory sex trade: “Anyone who thinks it is hyperbole to describe sex trafficking as slavery should look at the maimed face of a teenage girl, Long Pross. Glance at Pross from her left, and she looks like a normal, fun-loving girl, with a pretty face and a joyous smile. Then move around, and you see where her brothel owner gouged out her right eye”. According to Kristof, the empty socket which marred the beautiful face of young Pross was only one of countless scars left by indurate brothel owners and pimps on the prepubescent bodies of tortured sex slaves.

Following the archetypical narrative of many of the victims Kristof writes about, “Pross was 13 and hadn’t even had her first period when a young woman kidnapped her and sold her to a brothel in Phnom Penh”. Kristof claims that Pross was tortured with electric current, locked deep inside the brothel, allowed to move only to pleasure Johns, denied the rights to keep her pay or wear condoms, and ultimately forced to undergo two “crude” abortions. According to Kristof, when Pross begged for rest, the brothel manager “gouged out Pross’s right eye with a piece of metal…Pross’s eye grew infected and monstrous, spraying blood and pus on customers”.

Eventually, Pross was rescued by Somaly Mam, a well know Cambodian activist whose 2009 memoir The Road of Lost Innocence brought attention to sex trafficking through her own harrowing story of exploitation in the sex trade. Due to her marketing savvy and chilling narrative, Mam attracted the attention of multinational organizations, celebrities such as Oprah Winfrey, journalists like Nicholas Kristof, and was even listed among Time magazine’s 100 Most Influential People of 2009. By 2011, the Somaly Mam Foundation attracted $2.1 million in revenue and incurred $3.67 million in expenses ( CNN 2014 ). Mam, a woman who claimed to have been sold by her grandfather into sexual slavery at the age of 14, became the face of the fight against sex trafficking.

However, in May of 2014, a Newsweek cover story exposed Somaly Mam for allegedly fabricating her own story and the stories of the young girls she championed. According to Newsweek, Somaly Mam was never sold for sex. Nor was Long Pross. When Pross was 13, a nonmalignant tumor which covered her eye was surgically removed. There were no electrical currants. No rape. No torture. No piece of metal gouged deeply into her eye. Those were lies. Lies propagated by Somaly Mam. And to some extent, lies encouraged by the Western media who had been captivated by increasingly horrific tales of sexual predation.

Like Pross, Meas Ratha’s testimony shook the Western world. Through tears, in 1998 she told the world about how she was sold as a sex slave to a brothel and held against her will. However, in 2013 Ratha also confessed that she had never been a sex worker. Her story was carefully crafted by Somaly Mam. Ratha auditioned for the part, rehearsed the details, practiced the tears, and ultimately performed the tragic tale for the cameras. Ratha came to Mam not to escape from the violent abuses of an evil pimp, but rather from the far less lurid (yet far more prevalent) quotidian violence of poverty.

When New York Time’s editor Margaret Sullivan asked Kristof to explain how he failed to see through Somaly Mam’s dissimulation over the years (as he steadfastly wrote about her heroism in multiple columns), he responded that despite the accusations of Somaly’s fabrications, “I am certain that the larger problem of trafficking in Cambodia is real”. He continued, “You ask about verifying facts in the developing world. Ages, names and histories are sometimes elastic…”. Here Kristof does essentially what each and every one of his columns does – sees the truth of exact events, dates, and ages as immaterial, inconvenient obfuscations of the Truth. “I’ve seen children for sale in Cambodian brothels,” Kristof argues. Somaly’s story may have been a lie, Pross’s story may have been one too, but they are mere fictionalized accounts of nonfiction, Kristof seems to reason. And this metanarrative of predation and stained innocence, that’s the Truth. The truth that matters.

The problem isn’t that Kristof was unlucky enough to be duped by a source, rather, that each week Kristof looks to feed his readership superlative suffering, traveling the world in search of ever more captivating victims and the heroes who save them. Long Pross was a perfect victim, and in turn, Somaly Mam the ideal savoir. Indeed, Somaly Mam was able to create and propagate fiction so easily because those listening believed her stories even before they heard them.

Like the dynamics surrounding the fistula industry, Somaly Mam’s story highlights the way in which the more violent and horrid a girl’s story, and the younger the girl, the more effective she is in raising awareness, indignation, and most importantly, money. As NY Mag’s Kat Stoeffel puts it, “It’s easy to see why news outlets and do-gooder celebrities flocked to Mam’s cause. The American media worries about no one as much as it does young women, in particular their sexual exploitation. The younger, the more fuel for our outrage”. “Mam brought to the cause the credibility of a survivor — however dubious — plus telegenic good looks to rival her celebrity advocates. It seemed like a perfect package”.

Despite the liberties she had taken with her own life story, Somaly Mam and “her girls” have raised money and heightened attention worldwide to sex trafficking in Southeast Asia. So, how important are the details? What’s a white lie when the illusion saves lives? Well, some believe that Mam’s loose relationship with the truth has ultimately hurt rather than helped Cambodian sex workers. After Cambodia was placed on a State Department watch list in 2008 (thanks to some degree to Mam’s advocacy work), brutal raids and “rescue operations” were carried out by the State. According to a Human Rights Watch report, rather than rescued, sex workers were abused, beat with sticks, fists, and even electric shock batons (at least two were reported to have been beaten to death), extorted and frequently raped at the hands of authorities during rescue operations and in detention centers.

In development and humanitarian aid advocacy, “white lies”, fabrications, embellishments, and souped-up stories masquerade as true reflections of suffering, justified by the belief in a greater good. But ultimately, this race-to-the-bottom competition for attention may only succeed in benefiting the industry carefully built around pet causes (be it sex trafficking, female genital cutting, or fistula) rather than the victims themselves.

article link


Posted in Asia, Brothels, Cambodia, charities, Colorado, Denver, essays, Human Trafficking, Law, Long Pros, Nicholas Kristof, proposition35, Prostitution, Rape, research, research paper, sex, Sex Slavery, Sex Tourism, Sex Trafficking, Sex Workers, Somaly Mam, statistics, THE TRUTH ABOUT SEX TRAFFICKING, SEX SLAVERY, PROSTITUTION, SEX WORKERS, HUMAN TRAFFICKING, FORCED PAID SEX, SEX SLAVES, HOOKERS, PIMPS, PIMPING, BROTHELS, JOHNS, SEX FOR MONEY, CALL GIRLS, SEX WORK,, victims | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment