Sex traffickers operate in plain sight

A report on the technology used in the Irish sex trade describes the use of websites to advertise escorts as a “shop window” for sex buyers.

The Sexual Exploitation Research and Policy (SERP) Institute’s briefing paper also points out that a loophole in the law allows the pimps and sex traffickers behind such websites to escape prosecution, but this is just one of the many horrors the report put in the spotlight.

The dehumanizing effect of online activity may have dulled our sensitivity to some of the dystopian extremes offered up in the virtual world, but SERP’s report should make us reconsider what is and is not acceptable in a decent society. For example, the organization states that these sites provide users with a menu, allowing them to choose women based on a range of options and details: age, nationality, ethnicity, dress size, and so on.

In previous decades, the idea that a woman’s features could be filtered in this way would have been the domain of science fiction. As SERP has noted, this is now an everyday reality: reducing women to a set of attributes is an option available at the touch of a button on the smartphone.

The commodification of people is a general degradation, but in this specific context there are other considerations that may be more pressing. SERP has raised concerns about the age of some women featured on these websites, while others’ photos show them to be already injured. Furthermore, sex trafficking is a serious problem wherever women are involved, and there is no reason to believe this is any different in Ireland.

Those who organize and run these websites may operate anonymously, but SERP’s Ruth Breslin asked a fundamental question yesterday that should provoke a response from authorities: How can such sites advertise something that is illegal in this jurisdiction?

The only positive here is that the report makes exploitation clearly visible, removing any excuse for not taking action against it.

Showing the money to sweat

At first glance, this sounds like a premise from the old Yes, Minister series. The Oireachtas will spend €190,000 on a fitness instructor who will be tasked with keeping TDs, senators and staff in shape.

They will be responsible for all aspects of the on-site management and operation of the Houses of the Oireachtas Service Fitness Room, and for developing appropriate personalized training programs for users, including group exercise classes where possible.

Expect the puns and jokes to come thick and fast.

On a serious note, it’s hard to see the justification for having a gym instructor for politicians when other citizens and employees pay for such services themselves.

It is even harder to justify when you consider that the majority of these politicians are only in Dublin two nights a week while the Oireachtas are in session, spending the rest of their time in constituencies in the four corners of the country.

The instructor may end up largely devising programs for Dublin politicians.

Reports indicate that making the fitness center available to Leinster House staff means that the potential user population of the facility is approximately 1,000 individual users, but this number must be considered in conjunction with the center’s opening hours.

The fitness room is open 18.5 hours per week during non-sitting sessions and 27.5 hours per week during sitting weeks.

Those 1,000 individual users would do well to train regularly a few times during those opening hours, especially considering that the fitness room can only accommodate 12 to 15 users at a time.

It hardly needs to be pointed out that the facilities at Leinster House have been closely monitored in recent days, with particular attention paid to value for money. Investing in health and wellness is commendable, but this seems excessive. It is certainly not up to our public representatives to make their own appointments when it comes to pumping iron.

A battle of tastes

Fiddles at Dawn: A war of words has broken out in the world of traditional music.

Readers may be aware that John Sheahan of The Dubliners and Phil Coulter were critical of modern bands The Mary Wallopers and Lankum in a recent interview.

Coulter said: “I don’t think any of them are as good as The Dubliners.”

Sheahan said: “They are mediocre musicians and singers. I’m not that impressed with The Mary Wallopers. They wouldn’t be my first choice as a guest on a solo show of mine.”

It was somewhat surprising to read that kind of frank criticism, and the response was swift. Lankum reposted a message from Spider Stacy of The Pogues: “Phil Coulter is an old fool who means nothing and clearly has no ears anymore. But I expected more from John Sheehan. What the hell did he think of us if he thinks the Wallopers are ‘mediocre musicians’?”. The Mary Wallopers’ response was even more robust, if unrepeatable in a family newspaper.

Personal opinions and tastes will always vary, but Coulter and Sheahan’s comments were unnecessarily mean-spirited. It would be Pollyannaish to expect all artists to always be on good terms with each other, but it is reasonable to hope for a sense of generosity expressed among those engaged in a common artistic endeavor.