I was broadening the concept of ‘captive’ because it is an applicable term to the situation of most women. The conversation was extending itself to prostitution in general and concepts of ‘agency’ within that category. The question, ‘is it bad?’ is not warranted because there is no case in which prostitution is actually a healthy choice for a woman. Perhaps the point of calling the offer of rescue a ‘demeaning’ action is more in line with a fear of having the offer refused? That should be left up to the individual receiving the offer.

Offers of help should not be conditional upon the idea that it is not needed in such cases. There is an inherent harm inflicted upon anyone trading their body for material or psychological gain (for status in society). Refusal of help is generally seen in people who didn’t have it at the crucial point when first experiencing such subjugation. It becomes normal, expected and useless to protest so ‘agency’ in such a case becomes self-empowering within that paradigm. Hence, collaborators within the system are born.

Sorry if I am not being clear.

A second form of ‘captivity’ exists among those unaffiliated with some form of family constellation or business. They are extraneous to society and also wind up without the protection of the ‘herd’. Without ‘belonging’ to someone (women as chattel), captivity continues because no one personally benefits/profits from their status as either sources of sexual gratification or as ‘placeholders’ within a household or business network. The woman becomes functionless in society. Have you seen what happens when women without children apply for welfare? The hazards of women using shelters? Taken to its extreme, you have the practice of ’suttee’, as mentioned in my prior post.

An absence of function according to the ideology of the ‘P’, is another form of captivity for women. It is only freedom (‘another word for nothing left to lose’?) when adequate resources exist to maintain one’s solitary journey outside of the system. A rare situation.

Certainly, physical captivity as in conventionally defined trafficking, is an international horror which requires governmental interventions. Where it is an obvious condition, certainly authorities must free the individual. The question remains, where and in what condition would they be ‘freed’ to reside? Immigration reform would have to include a provision for declaring women to be eligible for political asylum in societies where their sexual abuse is legislated (as in Afghanistan) or endemic to the region (rape as a weapon of war). That is the only scenario in which these women won’t have to choose to trade their bodies for a transfer to another shore. It still doesn’t mean that prostitution won’t be their only option once they arrive there, in one form or another.

Where will aid come from? Oppressed groups have always had to organize their own means for winning freedom through private channels and organizations until they could become publicly endorsed and supported. From underground railroads to labor unions, ‘captive’ individuals have been supported. Asking if rescue is needed just delays action.

The question, I would put to you Agasaya, is what help. At least, that is what I would have thought the crux of Auguistin’s book might have been interpreted as: it’s not “does the situation require intervention?” or “is it bad?”; rather, is the trafficking paradigm providing the most effective help to those that need it.

Also; I’m talking about poor country trafficking – again (and again and again): it’s a very different dynamic what you seem to be talking about (though I’m not sure what the living in a car and forgoing medical help have to do with anything). Immigration reform is one way to drastically change the situation (help without rescuing) of millions of women wold wide, who could very easily end up in/are in a situation where they have been trafficked for sex. Other options : economic imp etc..

Agh. I have to run out the door, I’m already late – but as quick as possible: i’m not suggesting that women who are *presently* in a captive situation be left where they are; I’m talking more preventative and reintegration options. This may be where we’re parting ways?

Do you know what it is to be hungry, live in a car, forgo medical care and realize that there is no one coming to the rescue because

1. it is politically incorrect to assume help is needed because it might shame the individual OR

2. it is politically incorrect to provide help even when asked because that is reducing someone’s autonomy?

After all, isn’t help what official agencies are intended to accomplish?

It really isn’t hard to know when help is needed. It’s really about how much we want to offer it.

I understand your point that acting like women always need rescuing because they’re so helpless is demeaning. My point is simply that saying, “It was her choice, leave her alone,” is assuming agency that she may not actually have. It seems like victim-blaming: “She made her bed, now let her sleep in it.” So often, very young girls are sucked in, since men seem to especially enjoy raping tiny virgins – how can a girl have made such a choice?

The US made up BS about rescuing Afghans and Iraqis in order to get approval for their war plans. Ain’t no good intentions involved.

And – How much you’re paid has nothing to do with it. Nadda. Naught. KaPut – unless it’s a deliberate withholding of payment in order to keep the trafficked person captive, or reduction of pay to a level that eliminates ones capacity to repay an initial loan. And i know, shudder to think, but there are lots of places in the world where $10 is a veritable fortune; a week, two weeks income at a hit. If you’re going to come up with a number that below which you refuse to believe anyone one would transact for, go with a proportion of per capita or average daily income or something; it makes a much more universal line in the sand.

figleaf: the bought and sold for labour bit – where is that line drawn though? if immigration laws in the country of destination essentially keep a worker captive there (eg: malaysia), and they’ve taken out a large loan from an employment contractor to front for the fees – is that bought labour? it falls very throughly into the migrant worker category, but there are definitely features of captivity. Are they trafficked? Or just badly exploited? What about migrant brides? I’m with Auguistin in her frustrations on how the term “trafficked” is applied; I don’t think there are cases of trafficking per say – but often times these *are* designated as trafficked, the result of which is that real underlying issues are overlooked; and women in dramatic sex slavery situations are also short changed. They’re certainly problematic in their own way, but trafficking has become this coverall term – and that brings with it a whole new set of problems.

But in the end, it’s always someone wanting to make $/to exploit/take advantage of someone else; trafficking, labour exploitation, captive labour, all of it. Humans are pathological, aren’t we?

I appreciate that it would be nice if women were treated as human beings, capable of making their own decisions, and weren’t patronized. But the sad fact is, most (perhaps all remaining) cultures treat women as subhuman, and far fewer options are available to them. We all need rescuing – from the P.

Tigs, thank you for the comment about Angela Davis/Nat Turner. I agree that women who are able to resist becoming prostitutes are heroic, and those who do succumb should never be blamed, due to their miserable circumstances.

You would think that organizations would be able to differentiate “trafficked” from “willing” by the amount of pay she receives. I refuse to believe that any girl who gets $10 per rape is in any way willing. She doesn’t get to choose between Harvard and Yale. All too often, hers is a choice of selling sex or prostituting herself some other way (marrying an abuser, working at WalMart, etc.)

Illusory choice is one of the favorite tools of the patriarchy.

If you have a choice, you choose the Lesser of the Evils presented.

End Of Story.

If you don’t have a choice, you Do What You Can.

Any questions?