Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Crime Microsoft Oracle

Tech Bros Bought Sex Trafficking Victims Using Amazon and Microsoft Work Emails (newsweek.com) 321

An anonymous reader writes: Newsweek's National Politics Correspondent reports on "a horny nest of prostitution 'hobbyists' at tech giants Microsoft, Amazon and other firms in Seattle," citing "hundreds" of emails "fired off by employees at major tech companies hoping to hook up with trafficked Asian women" between 2014 and 2016, "67 sent from Microsoft, 63 sent from Amazon email accounts and dozens more sent from some of Seattle's premier tech companies and others based elsewhere but with offices in Seattle, including T-Mobile and Oracle, as well as many local, smaller tech firms." Many of the emails came from a sting operation against online prostitution review boards, and were obtained through a public records request to the King County Prosecutor's Office.

"They were on their work accounts because Seattle pimps routinely asked first-time sex-buyers to prove they were not cops by sending an employee email or badge," reports Newsweek, criticizing "the widespread and often nonchalant attitude toward buying sex from trafficked women, a process made shockingly more efficient by internet technology... A study commissioned by the Department of Justice found that Seattle has the fastest-growing sex industry in the United States, more than doubling in size between 2005 and 2012. That boom correlates neatly with the boom of the tech sector there... Some of these men spent $30,000 to $50,000 a year, according to authorities." A lawyer for some of the men argues that Seattle's tech giants aren't conducting any training to increase employees' compassion for trafficked women in brothels. The director of research for a national anti-trafficking group cites the time Uber analyzed ride-sharing data and reported a correlation between high-crime neighborhoods and frequent Uber trips -- including people paying for prostitutes. "They made a map using their ride-share data, like it was a funny thing they could do with their data. It was done so flippantly."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Tech Bros Bought Sex Trafficking Victims Using Amazon and Microsoft Work Emails

Comments Filter:
  • by jawtheshark ( 198669 ) * <slashdot&jawtheshark,com> on Sunday December 31, 2017 @07:38AM (#55838077) Homepage Journal
    Legalize prostitution: If you prohibit something that has demand, illegal/black markets *will* be created. It would also be easier to help the women who want to quit and don’t manage on their own. Health controls could be done, which benefits both clients and sellers.

    Not to mention, you could tax it. Just make it a job like an artist or a performer.

    • by TuballoyThunder ( 534063 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @08:29AM (#55838215)
      I do not think legalizing prostitution will stop sex trafficking. Even in Amsterdam, which has legal prostitution, still has sex trafficking problems (one example https://nltimes.nl/2017/05/18/... [nltimes.nl]).
      • by Kohath ( 38547 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @09:30AM (#55838361)

        What if it only stops half of it?

      • by cerberusss ( 660701 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @09:33AM (#55838375) Homepage Journal

        Big problem with "stopping sex trafficking" is that you'd have to have reliable numbers before and after the attempt to stop it. Unfortunately, there's a whole industry (both inside and outside of police) who earn their money dealing with sex trafficking. On top of that, it's hard to challenge those numbers, because you don't want to be that person.

        So any and all news coming from police about sex trafficking numbers is suspect to me.

      • Article is hypothetical if not fantastical since it is claiming women are victims of trafficking without knowing it. If the "problem" is really underage prostitution, then rounding up the delinquents is more what needs to be done than heroically fighting sex slavery.
      • for woman to step forward because they're not already doing something that's illegal. You can argue they're the victim and don't have to fear stepping forward, but as a rule poor and exploited people don't have good experiences with authorities.

        A better solution would be wide scale social safety nets like basic income combined with trade deals that demand 2nd and 3rd world countries treat their workers equal to first world nations or lose access to first world markets. Then again I've probably got a bet
        • Basic income doesn't solve "sex trafficking" - where it is sex which is the thing trafficked, not humans.
          It will exist as long as there are those willing to PAY FOR IT - only the prices will go up.
          Quality of "service" for customers or life for the sex workers... Not necessarily. Both of those require regulation and control.

          As for "trade deals that demand 2nd and 3rd world countries treat their workers equal to first world nations" - I'm guessing you will cover that difference from your pocket? For the entir

    • by DaMattster ( 977781 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @10:56AM (#55838719)

      Legalize prostitution: If you prohibit something that has demand, illegal/black markets *will* be created. It would also be easier to help the women who want to quit and don’t manage on their own. Health controls could be done, which benefits both clients and sellers.

      Not to mention, you could tax it. Just make it a job like an artist or a performer.

      Criminalizing certain vices; the prohibition of gambling, prostitution, and even drugs has fueled the rise in violent, organized crime. Where there is a demand for a product or a service, a market will exist. The mafia made fortunes on bootlegging and other vice crimes throughout the 20th century. When you criminalize a service or product, it becomes unregulated and MUCH more dangerous. It's time to admit that these vice crimes just need to go away. If we legalized and regulated drugs, then the domino effect of violence that results from drugs starts to go away.

      • If we legalized and regulated drugs, then the domino effect of violence that results from drugs starts to go away.

        "Feeling blue? Need a pick-me-up? Get VitaRise! Cocaine in a pill! From GlaxoSmithKline."

        Doesn't seem likely. Unfortunately even if all drugs are legalized, 40 years of anti-(some)-drug propaganda has had a lasting effect. It will take another 40 years before the promised benefits of legalization actually take serious effect, just because of human social inertia. Look at marijuana dispensaries today. Admittedly, national brands can't participate in that space because it's not yet a national market,

        • "Feeling blue? Need a pick-me-up? Get VitaRise! Cocaine in a pill! From GlaxoSmithKline."

          Funny, but getting from a known, regulated source, without the danger of unknown contents or getting killed trying to make a purchase would be big selling point. With a ready recreational market, drug companies might be inclined to research how some of these drugs could be made safer or less addictive.
          Nevermind that when you subtract suicides, drug (gang) related homicides are far and away the largest source of gun rel

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          The main benefits of Drug Legalization are: lower crime rates (most mugging/theft/break and enter are for drug money and legal drugs cost less), fewer drug addict deaths (drug quality control), less money to organized crime and terrorism (smuggling funds a lot of terrorists). We'd get those benefits in about 3 months (time to set up shop).
        • by Rande ( 255599 )

          No, legalised like tobacco - in plain packaging with logos like 'THIS DRUG WITH HARM YOUR FETUS' on the outside.
          No one is saying recreational drugs are good for you - only that prohibition is worse than legalisation.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @11:18AM (#55838805)

      And in any sane country, that has happened a long time ago. It is also patently false to think that most women in prostitution are forced into it. Or at least not more forced than anybody that has to work for a living. They just look at their options and decide that it is this one they like best. In countries were prostitution is legal or decriminalized, it is extremely rare to find anybody forced into prostitution, and it is usually one of the first few customers (often the very first one) that calls the police and gets the victim freed. Of course that only works if said customer does not need to fear prosecution....

      With the thoroughly insane idea of making prostitution illegal in the US, the prohibitionists get to design the narrative, and they are shamelessly lying to promote their evil agenda. Suddenly, everybody selling sex is "trafficked", when that is very far from the truth indeed. And suddenly there are incredible masses of underage prostitutes, when in actual reality they are very rare. The "average age entering the sex trade" becomes 13, when in actual reality it is more like 22. And do not forget that prostitution being illegal correlates with significantly higher rates of rape. This evil has to stop.

      • by Solandri ( 704621 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @02:23PM (#55839675)

        In countries were prostitution is legal or decriminalized, it is extremely rare to find anybody forced into prostitution

        The data doesn't seem to support that assertation [harvard.edu].

        The studyâ(TM)s findings include:

        • Countries with legalized prostitution are associated with higher human trafficking inflows than countries where prostitution is prohibited. The scale effect of legalizing prostitution, i.e. expansion of the market, outweighs the substitution effect, where legal sex workers are favored over illegal workers. On average, countries with legalized prostitution report a greater incidence of human trafficking inflows.
        • The effect of legal prostitution on human trafficking inflows is stronger in high-income countries than middle-income countries. Because trafficking for the purpose of sexual exploitation requires that clients in a potential destination country have sufficient purchasing power, domestic supply acts as a constraint.
        • Criminalization of prostitution in Sweden resulted in the shrinking of the prostitution market and the decline of human trafficking inflows. Cross-country comparisons of Sweden with Denmark (where prostitution is decriminalized) and Germany (expanded legalization of prostitution) are consistent with the quantitative analysis, showing that trafficking inflows decreased with criminalization and increased with legalization.
        • The type of legalization of prostitution does not matter â" it only matters whether prostitution is legal or not. Whether third-party involvement (persons who facilitate the prostitution businesses, i.e, âoepimpsâ) is allowed or not does not have an effect on human trafficking inflows into a country. Legalization of prostitution itself is more important in explaining human trafficking than the type of legalization.
        • Democracies have a higher probability of increased human-trafficking inflows than non-democratic countries. There is a 13.4% higher probability of receiving higher inflows in a democratic country than otherwise.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    So it seems I work with some people involved which sucks. But can we please not have sex trafficking mandatory training from HR next year? People who aren't sick fucks don't need a training video to show them how to act like humans.

  • by Rei ( 128717 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @07:47AM (#55838095) Homepage

    It's not that there aren't people who want to work in the sex industry - there absolutely are. However, as studies repeatedly bear out, the number who want to is far below the demand; most people who work in the sex industry don't want to be there, and abusive trafficking is an inevitable consequence of this situation.

    Making prostitution symmetrically illegal doesn't solve the problem. By making it illegal and aggressively policing it, yes, you cut down on part of the demand. But you also cut down on the supply. And since the ratio of clients to sex workers is far greater than 1, it's much easier to crack down on the "supply" side of the equation, thus increasing the trafficking motive. On the other hand, making it fully legal causes a boom in demand (and especially sex tourism), which usually is associated with a trafficking boom.

    I'm personally a fan of the Nordic system: purchasing sex is illegal, as is pimping, but selling sex is perfectly illegal. After all, if your goal is to stamp out trafficking and protect abused women, why would you throw them in jail? The Nordic system cuts demand without cutting supply, thus heavily damaging the trafficking motive; it's been very successful. There are some things you have to be careful about, of course - for example, in the first version of the Swedish laws they had problems with landlords kicking prostitutes out, out of fear that they'd get caught up in anti-pimping / anti-brothel laws (the laws were later amended to address this). But in general it's been shown to work well. It also makes it so that prostitutes are unafraid of having to deal with the police, which means better crime reporting and an all-around better environment for them.

    • by GNious ( 953874 )

      I'm personally a fan of the Nordic system: purchasing sex is illegal, as is pimping, but selling sex is perfectly illegal.

      Interesting that this is called the "Nordic system".
      I might be wrong, but only Norway + Sweden have rules like this, while a rule against pimping and brothels seem more common in the Nordic countries.

      After Sweden introduced their ban on purchasing sex, violence against sex workers reportedly went up, as did the number of "johns" going to Denmark for sex. Effectively, it had little impact on the number of customers, it made things worse for the sex workers, and the politicians started patting themselves on t

      • by Rei ( 128717 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @09:33AM (#55838377) Homepage

        I don't know every country which has it, but I can tell you that it's that way here in Iceland, too. And Finland. Denmark is the only Nordic which doesn't use it.

        After Sweden introduced their ban on purchasing sex, violence against sex workers reportedly went up

        This is a lie based around this report [wordpress.com]. The short of it: Since the law passed, the following reports of changes have occurred:

        Verbal abuse: +17%
        Hair pulling: +167% (but still only a third of those surveyed reported any hair pulling)
        Being struck with a fist: -38%
        Rape: -48%.

        Because when you consider them all together and equal, it's a net increase of 7% (52% to 59%), that's "violence is up". But most of those cases are verbal abuse. The most extreme examples, such as rape, went down by half.

        Street prostitution decreased by 50% and indoor prostitution by 16% since the law was passed [google.com]. The rate of prostitutes seeking help from the police decreased by 41%, but rather than this being some sort of "afraid of the police" situation (they're not legally liable for anything), rates of seeking help from ProSentret decreased by 54% - an even greater amount. The simple fact is, severe violence dramatically decreased since the Nordic Model was adopted.

        The estimates on the number of prostitutes operating in Sweden dropped significantly after the law was passed, and are 1/10th the number as in (lower population) Denmark. A study by Durex found that Sweden had the lowest percentage of the population (among 34 countries surveyed) of men paying for sex, at 3%. But as for:

        as did the number of "johns" going to Denmark for sex.

        Obviously, just on the face of this, this is stupid. The concept that you'll get the same rate of people visiting prostitutes when they can get it where they live vs. where they have to drive for hours (Stockholm to Copenhagen = 10 hours round trip) and pay ~$50 each way to cross the bridge (let alone the super-expensive Nordic gas prices) is nonsense. Furthermore, the rate of people going to Denmark to buy prostitutes has not increased [tandfonline.com]. A large majority of the population in countries with the Nordic model strongly support it, not just "politicians". Only 25% of Swedish men and 7% of Swedish women support repealing it.

        • by GNious ( 953874 )

          I should mention I'm basically repeated what's been in the news, primarily in DK. There was a larger effort to look at sex work some years back, incl a look at the effects in Sweden something like a year after they introduced those laws.
          And yes, it was at the time absolutely reported that the numbers went up in DK as a result of the changes in Sweden.

          If things have improved since mid-2000s (not following the news there as closely since I left), good on them.

      • I'm personally a fan of the Nordic system: purchasing sex is illegal, as is pimping, but selling sex is perfectly illegal.

        Interesting that this is called the "Nordic system". I might be wrong, but only Norway + Sweden have rules like this,

        Denmark and Iceland too Finland is similar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org], https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org], and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

        Denmark and Iceland are considered Scandinavian and Nordic.

        Next time do your homework

    • by wisnoskij ( 1206448 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @08:20AM (#55838183) Homepage

      I find the same thing where I work. Ask around, and everyone would rather be at home than at work.

    • purchasing sex is illegal, as is pimping, but selling sex is perfectly illegal

      As a solution to human trafficking this sounds like a good solution, except that it really isn't all that. [washingtontimes.com] This solution fits so very nicely with today's zeitgeist, and so we are rather invested in believing that it works.

      Not to mention there's an important moral issue with this solution, in that it criminalizes a transaction - and one-sidedly at that - between what in a lot of cases are consenting adults. If 9 out of 10 women work in the industry against their will, that doesn't make it right to arrest

      • by Rei ( 128717 )

        Lol, how did I know that that article's source was going to be Petra Östergren? Literally whenever anyone wants to claim anything against the Nordic Model, it comes down to her rantings ;)

        Meanwhile... [springer.com]

        The Swedish case thus seems to support the claim of a causal link from law to reduced trafficking. Furthermore, there are indications that traffickers consider the legal rules surrounding prostitution when choosing destination countries. For instance, Swedish police investigations using taped phone conve

        • You realize the exact same argument could be used to ignore everything YOU post?

        • Even if the Nordic model is effective against human trafficking (something of which I am by no means convinced given the data on the subject... but what do I know, the fact remains that the measure criminalizes otherwise perfectly legal and moral behaviour. For example: what about sex dates with mornig after regret? If one partner claims rape, the prosecution will have to prove that rape actually took place. But a lot of people who regularly have sex(ual) dates (for instance: ask kinky communities in Swe
    • We need to start an open source sexbot movement. They will fulfill an important need, but can't be under the sole control of corporations who have already shown themselves to be untrustworthy by spying on customers and using DRM.

      Start with GNU vibrators that support remote control over secure net connections. Sarah Jamie Lewis has already made a great start on this. In time we need to make sure that Free high quality blowjobs are available for anyone to download. VR should be a target too.

      • As much as I like the idea of sexbots, I also expect that the moment they become even half-way realistic there will be a worldwide movement to ban them. It'll probably involve stories describing how perverts can modify sex-bots to look or act like children.

        Remember that even America, one of the world's more sexually open countries (if not so much as parts of Europe), it is a criminal offence to sell a dildo in Texas or Alabama.

    • by ffkom ( 3519199 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @10:01AM (#55838471)

      It's not that there aren't people who want to work in the sex industry - there absolutely are. However, as studies repeatedly bear out, the number who want to is far below the demand

      If there is more demand than is on offer, prices rise, and the job becomes appealing to a larger group of people. What you describe is what happenes when instead of paying adequate wages, people from poorer countries are imported to dump prices. That is not different with prostitution than with any other job.

      most people who work in the sex industry don't want to be there

      Most people who work in any industry (except for a very few glamorous professions) would rather like are less strenuous and higher payed job. Again, not in any way specific to prostitution.

      abusive trafficking is an inevitable consequence of this situation.

      No. Abusive trafficking is happening for a lot of reasons and for many kinds of work - just look into gastronomy and construction sites, where you can find the same "slave like" working conditions with workers "paying off debts" to those who trafficked them into the country.

      Abusive trafficking is the inevitable consequence of lacking prosecution of those who traffick and those who do not adhere to existing labor laws.

      Regarding the absurd "asymmetric" anti-prostitution laws in Sweden: If there was any honesty in those who want to criminalize prostitution, they would apply the same logic to many other professions: So eating in a restaurant where a trafficked worker cooked your meal would be illegal. Being helped by some trafficked nurse would be criminalized. Having your garden shack built by a company who brings trafficked workers to your site would make you a criminal.

      Once you think of this, you might realize that the Swedish law is not at all against trafficking, it is against sex services being on offer in general, for irrational reasons.

      • most people who work in the sex industry don't want to be there

        Most people who work in any industry ... would rather like are [sic] less strenuous and higher payed job. Again, not in any way specific to prostitution.

        Prostitution is an easier way of making money than in most jobs, provided the woman is independent or working with a small group (2 or 3) of similar other women, especially if they have poor qualifications or no other skills. This is provided they have the attitude and stomach for it of course, and this does not generally apply to trafficked women.

      • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

        Rejecting effective solutions for the sake of consistency is dumb.

        Often the trafficked women cost more because they can be forced to do stuff other women won't. They were clearly offering something more or no one would have taken the risk of sending their work ID and using their work email when they could have just used locals anonymously.

  • by Jarwulf ( 530523 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @07:52AM (#55838113)
    Seems every generation society gets on this hysterical kick about something threatening their children/womenfolk. While back it was the indians, then sometimes later the yellow peril, then later blacks, and not too long ago satanists. Now I guess its obese greasy white IT nerds. Every notice how you never or rarely heard of sex trafficking before yet starting a few years ago if you believe the stories all of a sudden every town is blanketed with hidden lairs of hundreds of chained up damsels lying in darkened smoky brothels around every corner of town in america. And of course evil men are driving this. Yeah I pretty sure there's always been some hookers here or there who were forced into it, but its pretty hard not to be skeptical when almost all these stories are big on vagueness and sensationalism and small on details and the few that are followed up you often find even the hookers don't consider themselves 'slaves'
    • by Halo1 ( 136547 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @08:14AM (#55838159)

      Every notice how you never or rarely heard of sex trafficking before yet starting a few years ago

      Not really, even if you limit yourself to the US and "modern day history" [wikipedia.org].

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Not really generational as much as from what part of the world you came from. Middle Eastern countries as well as some Asian countries treat woman much more as second class then in places like the US and UK. Ethnic upbringing has created this continuous lack of respect for woman. Just because they move to the US and work at Microsoft. Doesn't mean they become more civilized towards woman or change that culture.

    • Actually I remember hearing a lot about it in the 90s. Here in Israel there were several news stories about sex trafficking in girls from what used to be the soviet union. Supposedly police busted several of the pimps to make it stop.

    • by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Numbers from sane countries where prostitution is not illegal indicate that people actually forced into it are extremely rare and that usually one of the first customers calls the police to get them freed. That does, of course, only work if said customer does not need to fear prosecution.

      Note that the need to work for a living and having selected this as the best option does not qualify as "having been forced into it". Also note that a driver or a bodyguard is not a "pimp", he is a helper employed by his bo

  • by George_Ou ( 849225 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @07:52AM (#55838115)
    Here's a story about prosecutors throwing people in jail for talking about prostitution by intimidating them with trumped up charges to get them to plea. Many got fired from their jobs. Others lost their friends and family and one man committed suicide. It's like how some cities resort to public shaming Johns which is such a horrific practice that even 18th century America stopped doing it. http://reason.com/archives/201... [reason.com]

    All of these anti-trafficking organizations use Superbowl TV commercials of women and/or child being sold as slaves (which is extremely rare) but if you read what their true goal is, they want to stop all prostitution. They even consider 100% voluntary prostitution as trafficking. Amnesty International has the right solution which is to legalize prostitution so that women aren't forced into the underground where they are victimized by their Pimps and by the Police.
    • by SuricouRaven ( 1897204 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @08:13AM (#55838151)

      On one those 'anti-trafficking' organisations, the National Center on Sexual Exploitation* (better know by their old name of Morality in Media, they rebranded because they were a laughing stock) features a 'dirty dozen' list every year of the twelve organisations they consider most destructive to sexual morality. Amnesty International is on the last two lists because they support decriminalisation of prostitution.

      They also list the American Library Association (for opposing government-mandated filtering), Amazon (for selling pornography), youtube, Comcast (for not blocking pornography by default) and HBO (for making Game of Thones, with "with copious amounts of gratuitous nudity, sex, and sexual violence.").

      There's a lesson to be learned here: Sometimes organisations try to veil their real goals. The National Center on Sexual Exploitation sounds like an organisation dedicated to protecting women, superficially, and their front page supports this interpretation - boldly claiming "NCOSE has a proven track record of changing corporate and government policies that previously facilitated sexual exploitation." But dig a little deeper and you find that their definition of 'exploitation' includes not only trafficking, but consentual prostitution and even the very absolute softest titillation of pornography - they have called upon Steam to ban Mass Effect: Andromeda as too racy. Dig a bit deeper still and you find they have campaigned for schools to block gay rights websites for 'promoting the homosexual lifestyle.'

      *Abbreviated NCOSE, by their own choice. Probably to avoid confusion with the NCSE, the National Center for Science Education.

      • by OzPeter ( 195038 )

        *Abbreviated NCOSE, by their own choice. Probably to avoid confusion with the NCSE, the National Center for Science Education.

        The "C" is silent, and hence the acronym is pronounced "Nosey"

      • aren't concerned about protecting victims, they're concerned about too much sin drawing God's wrath (or they're manipulating people who believe that). The goal isn't to protect sex trafficking victims, it's to enforce their moral code so God doesn't go all 'Sodom & Gomorrah' on them. It doesn't help that the Christian god has a history of punishing the faithful for the sins of the heretic...
        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          It's a bit of political posturing in this case. The NCOSE used to be an overtly Christian, right-wing pressure group dedicated to stamping out sinful media - they were called Morality in Media, and they tended to use language associated with the right-wing faction of politics - decency, morality, family. A few years ago they noticed that their name was a joke and nothing they said was taken seriously, so they completely reinvented themselves to turn from a right-wing anti-pornography organisation into a lef

  • These tech giants are the biggest employers there. Given the above average pay, their employees could form 80% or more of the people with significant disposable income. Given that, finding less than 100 from each of these companies is a big surprise.

    People who expect 50% of their employees to be women should expect 80% of the johns to be them. If not, these companies are doing a good job, actually. It smells of a shakedown operation by a law firm, fishing for a case.

  • Well, they are, but it is like saying that if you buy an iPhone, you are buying into slavery and child labor. It is just too hard to find a complex product that doesn't involve any of these at some point.

    They are just buying sex, and unfortunately, the market is dominated by trafficking. The legal system and stigma associated with prostitution doesn't give much choice.

  • The answer is to make a law: "Everything bad is illegal."
  • by XB-70 ( 812342 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @08:44AM (#55838247)
    If Oprah had just gone on TV and said: "Ladies, if you want to make a real difference in our society, then go out and give one (1) wet sloppy one a week to a man in need."

    That would end it plain and simple.

    No more Harvey Weinsteins. No more sexual predators. No more prostitution, sex trafficking victims and abuse.

    If the above seems like too much of a chore then we GoFundMe the ultimate BJ machine and install it in every men's room in the land. It would pay for itself in days with similar outcomes.

    If we don't deal with the root cause, horniness, we'll never solve any of these problems.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Wouldn't have stopped Weinstein. He could easily afford expensive prostitutes, but that wasn't what he wanted. It was about power, forcing young actress to do things with him.

      Same with trafficking. They want certain types of girl, otherwise why take the huge risks (sending your ID or using a work email) when for $50k a year you are not going to have difficulty getting laid?

      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Mashiki ( 184564 )

        Wouldn't have stopped Weinstein. He could easily afford expensive prostitutes, but that wasn't what he wanted. It was about power, forcing young actress to do things with him.

        Half right. In some of those cases it was young actresses doing things with him in order to further their own career and getting some money on the side, that's on top of the rape claims which may or maynot ever be proven. Rose Mcgowan who started this current outbreak, took money as payment not to shush her up but as a pay-off for the sex to further her own career. And that's by her own admission, with that I also expect to hear something in a few years that the reason she "spoke out" was because she was

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Your theory is that she slept with him to further her career, but then decided to sabotage it by extracting money from him... Doesn't sound like a great plan, especially as she was just one of eight people who got hush money and her other complaint at Amazon got her project dropped.

          Considering everything that Weinstein has simply admitted to, why do you need to invent improbable theories that make him the victim?

          • by Mashiki ( 184564 )

            Considering everything that Weinstein has simply admitted to, why do you need to invent improbable theories that make him the victim?

            Why are you making the assumption that he's a victim? Neither of them is a hero, neither is a victim. Both are whores selling themselves for differing things though, and neither had any care of the consequences of it. And both thought that they were getting something "of value" out of it as well, until they thought they no longer were. She's just as a shitty human being as he is, that's all there is to it.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      "Hey ladies, just make yourselves more open to being abused. Then there won't be any more abuse."

      Yeah, nice plan, dickhead.
      • So, men who don't have sex are inherently more dangerous?

        That's an awfully strong stereotype you are portraying, that having sex is a required part of being a normal man.
  • Why is sex trafficking the employer's responsibility to fix? This is something to be addressed by policing and international diplomacy efforts. Trade tarrifs against nations that ship out sex slaves for instance.

    See, this won't be stopped because those women won't fall into sex slavery if they have good paying jobs at home.

  • When I think of "tech bro" I think of the ex-fratboy culture among web developers in startups, rather than an Amazon or Microsoft employee. Amazon is known for working their employees insane hours, and Microsoft's culture favors working crazy hours if you want to get ahead. Maybe the tech bros are just well-paid staffers with no time on their hands and no desire to look for long-term companionship. I'm married and have a healthy relationship, but working in IT makes me well aware that some aren't interested

  • Tech bros? (Score:3, Funny)

    by cyber-vandal ( 148830 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @10:04AM (#55838485) Homepage

    Is this another "tech is a hotbed of evil women abusing misogynists" story?

  • A lawyer for some of the men argues that Seattle's tech giants aren't conducting any training to increase employees' compassion for trafficked women

    I would like to think anyone born in this country learns compassion growing up. But this sounds like it's something that these 'men' learned to be acceptable while growing up in another country. Now I'm curious of the nationality breakdown.

    • You mean the nationality of the lawyers? Probably born and bred American. The purpose of a statement like this is to get some money out of the tech companies for their "negligence" and put it into the lawyers' pockets.
  • Setting aside all other moral/practical considerations -- which, no, does not diminish them -- this is what stood out to me:

    A lawyer for some of the men argues that Seattle's tech giants aren't conducting any training to increase employees' compassion for trafficked women in brothels.

    Seeing that, all I could think was, "oh great, now my company's going to add yet another 'hey, don't be bad' training session."

    Do all these mandatory sessions actually accomplish anything? That is, aside from *wanting to believe* that they make a difference in behavior, do they actually make a measurable difference? Or is their sole purpose to provide a company with a due diligence out

    • by Shados ( 741919 )

      As long as people keep blaming "tech culture" for stuff that's really an omnipresent cultural problem across all groups no matter how you slice and dice it, tech companies will have to do stupid useless shit like this to show "they're doing something".

      This is a society problem, not a tech problem. If we can't get people to raise kids properly, then it will have to be done in public schools I guess. I remember my wife telling me the (extremely famous and highly rated) university she went to had mandatory sex

      • by Mashiki ( 184564 )

        This is a society problem, not a tech problem. If we can't get people to raise kids properly, then it will have to be done in public schools I guess. I remember my wife telling me the (extremely famous and highly rated) university she went to had mandatory sex ed where they had to teach people how to use a condom. I got thought that shit in 6th grade (yeah, elementary school). Everything else (like, you know, rape is bad, m'kay) was drilled in my head since I was a toddler.

        Most of the time it's not a society problem, it's a person problem. Though in some cases it is a social problem, and some groups of people are far worse. Look at it like this, the media and feminists fall all over screeching "dude tech-bros" and how we're all awful men. They'll screech over a couple of guys making a shitty dongle joke and ruin their lives. But they won't come out of the wood work when thousands of young girls are groomed, raped and forced into prostitution over 15 years. They'll even g

  • by slashdot_commentator ( 444053 ) on Sunday December 31, 2017 @11:59AM (#55839013) Journal

    Prostitution is the oldest profession in civilization. It probably existed before recorded civilization.

    But yeah, lets blame young tech workers for the problem. Lets blame "insensitivity". But lets ignore the politicians and the police, who set policy and can use immigration status to go after sex workers. Lets ignore capitalism, because they're all doing this for free. Lets blame news outlets for not covering this "tragedy" and making it the #1 issue in Seattle, as opposed to housing, infrastructure, law enforcement, and the residents themselves.

    Lets blame tech workers again, for using data to create a prostitution map, because their "callousness" and "inappropriate" sense of humor is the "root" of the problem. Where's the community "outreach" to their new residents paying taxes to their community? Ah, well they're
    Asians and Jews and geeks; who wants them marrying into the family? /s But lets keep pretending illegal immigration is not a problem, because Asian sex slaves are a moral horror, but there aren't taking White American sex slaves' livelihoods, so its not a big deal or relevant to the mechanics of the local trade.

    • then there's you implying whites are mostly to blame. There have been studies done on the ethnicity of clients in the major cities, there are two other groups leading the list before we get to whites at #3

  • More than half of the tech employees will be from sales, marketing, or management rather than the actual technical people.
  • About 50% of the coffee and cocoa we buy (assuming no fair trade) are produced by slaves, including child slaves. Somehow, nobody cares about it. Why?

Murphy's Law, that brash proletarian restatement of Godel's Theorem. -- Thomas Pynchon, "Gravity's Rainbow"

Working...