Sex worker to launch legal challenge against Northern Ireland prostitution ban

this is from the Feminazi Guardian anti-male newspaper not going to link to them.



A sex worker is using European human rights legislation to try to overturn a new law in Northern Ireland that makes it illegal to pay for prostitutes.

Dublin-born law graduate Laura Lee is launching an unprecedented legal challenge that could go all the way to Strasbourg, against a human trafficking bill which includes banning the payment for sex among consenting adults.

The region is the only part of the UK where people can be convicted of paying for sex. The law, which was championed by Democratic Unionist peer and Stormont assembly member Lord Morrow, comes into effect on 1 June.

Lee told the Guardian she will launch her case at the high court in Belfast in the same month as the law comes into effect.

The justice minister, David Ford, has already warned that the Police Service of Northern Ireland may not be able to convict men contacting prostitutes for sex because intercept evidence from clients’ mobile phones would be inadmissible in the courts.

Lee, 37, said: “I am doing this because I believe that when two consenting adults have sex behind closed doors and if money changes hands then that is none of the state’s business. The law they have introduced has nothing to do with people being trafficked but simply on their, the DUP’s, moral abhorrence of paid sex.

“I believe that after June 1st, sex workers’ lives in Northern Ireland will actually be harder and the industry will be pushed underground.”

Lee, who lives in Edinburgh but travels to Belfast and Dublin to see clients, said her legal team would be referencing several articles of the European convention on human rights to challenge and overturn Morrow’s law.

“First of all we will need to exhaust domestic remedies starting in the Belfast high court, possibly going to the supreme court, the House of Lords and eventually the European court of human rights.

“There are several articles that we can look starting with article 8 that governs the right to privacy. We will also focus on article 2 that concerns the right to life and we will argue that this law puts sex workers’ safety by the fact the legislation will drive the trade further and further underground.

“And then article 3 is about protection from degrading treatment, which is very relevant because in Scotland police have been subjecting sex workers to terrible things such as strip searching on women working in Edinburgh saunas. Our legal team will also refer to the right to earn a living enshrined in the European social charter.”

Lee said she will fund the case partly via crowdfunding on social media networks and from sex worker campaign groups across the world.

Lee, an Irish psychology graduate whose range of services include S&M and bondage, said she was also taking the legal challenge to thwart an attempt to introduce a similar law criminalising the consumers of sex in the Irish Republic.

An alliance of radical feminist groups and a number of nuns from Catholic religious orders are lobbying southern Irish political parties to pass a Nordic-style law outlawing the purchase of sex.

“This case hopefully will put a big dent in the campaign to bring in this law across the border in the Republic. There is a massive propaganda campaign to claim that north and south in Ireland sex workers are women who are trafficked into the country. This is total nonsense. In 2014 there wasn’t a single arrest in connection with sex trafficking in Northern Ireland. The majority of sex workers like myself are independent and 70% are single mothers trying to earn a living in these hard times. No one has the right to take that option away from them,” she said.

Morrow defended his bill and criticised any move via the courts to overturn the legislation.

“If Europe or any other court did this they would be ignoring the will of the people and the overwhelming majority of those in the Northern Ireland Assembly,” he said.

In October the Stormont assembly voted by 81 votes to 10 which in article 6 of Morrow’s anti-trafficking bill banned payment for sex.

John Doe v. Cornell

college women ain’t shit!

One night in December 2013, a male Cornell University student hooked up with a female student at the woman’s apartment. Both students had been drinking. More than two months later, the woman “filed a complaint against Plaintiff, alleging that Plaintiff raped Jane Doe on December 14, 2013, while she was incapacitated.” Note the word “Plaintiff” in that sentence and also note the word “complaint.” The female student did not file criminal charges; rather, she complained to university officials who conducted their own “investigation” and expelled the male student, who is now suing the university, saying that officials violated his rights:

In a 53-page complaint, the student’s attorneys launch a wide-ranging critique of both Cornell’s handling of the specific case and the overall framework of the university’s judicial system.
The lawsuit also assails the university’s decision in 2013 to lower the burden of proof for sexual assault cases from a “clear and convincing” standard of evidence to the much-lower “preponderance” standard of evidence.
But Cornell failed to administer even this lower standard of evidence fairly, the lawsuit contends.

You can read more at Legal Insurrection, where Professor William Jacobson notes that this is at least the third pending lawsuit by male students who have been subjected to unjust disciplinary proceedings for sexual assault claims. (Hat-tip: Instapundit.)

Rape is a felony. If someone rapes you, call the cops. Don’t wait two months and then demand that university officials to “investigate” your hookup and punish a guy because your casual hookup was unpleasant or embarrassing. While it is always impossible to know the truth of what happened in a “he-said/she-said” incident like this, let me point out what should be obvious: This was a one-night stand that occurred after four witnesses had been at the apartment with John Doe and his accuser, and evidently knew he spent the night with her. It would be a common-sense inference that, because this hookup was not followed by further sexual intimacy or a romantic relationship, that there was a lack of any deep attraction between John Doe and his accuser.

Ergo, to continue our common-sense inference, the accuser felt remorse about her behavior. Yet post-hookup remorse is (a) not uncommon and (b) not proof that the hookup was rape.


Can we be honest about our common-sense inferences here? Read the complaint closely. Both of these students were majoring in chemical engineering. The female is of German ancestry, while the male student is from California, studied piano for 10 years, was part of his high school “Science Bowl” club, and “John Doe’s immigrant parents strive for the ‘American Dream’ of educating John Doe at a prestigious University.”

I got $20 that says this guy is Asian-American, probably of Chinese ancestry. Anybody want to bet against me? No, you don’t.

OK, so the Teutonic Goddess spends the night with this geeky Asian guy. She perceives a subsequent diminution of her social status, and it is that which inspires her vengeful claim of rape.

If my common-sense inference is correct — c’mon, I got $20 here — thenJohn Doe v. Cornell would be at least the second such recent case. At Vassar College, Chinese-American student Peter Wu was accused of rape by white girl Mary Claire Walker.

A blog is not an appropriate venue to pass judgment on college students’ sexual activities, and neither is a college disciplinary process the appropriate venue to try a rape case. The sooner we all agree that rape is a felony, which should always and only be prosecuted in criminal courts, the better. Until such time, however, I’ll be here imposing judgment in these cases, employing the vast resources of slut-shaming misogyny available to me as an agent of male supremacy — including that most notorious weapon of the heteronormative patriarchy, common sense.

More Feminist Tumblr


Some people find feminist insanity amusing, but then again, some people find film footage of the 1934 Nuremberg Rally amusing.

If you’re the type of person who is amused by totalitarian propaganda, just go to and search for “feminism.” It’s an endless carnival of anti-male rage dispensed by lunatics like this “20-something, gender-fluid, bisexual”:

If you are a man who thinks it’s funny to make misogynist jokes purely to make your female friends uncomfortable/angry, then you are a misogynist. It is not “just a joke.” You literally are finding humor in the discomfort and dehumanization of women. You are not helping, you are not making satire. You are just being misogynist.

Perhaps you recognize the basic problem here.


Question: What is a “misogynist joke”?

Answer: A joke that a feminist doesn’t think is funny.

Q. Can you give me an example of a non-misogynist joke?

A. Die in a fire, you vile heteropatriarchal swine.

Q. Why are you so angry?

A. I’m not angry.

Q. But you just told me to die.

A. No, you asked me for a non-misogynist joke.

Q. And “die in a fire” is your idea of a joke?

A. Ha. Ha. Ha.

Feminists are forever playing their Thought Police game, categorizing (a) male behavior they don’t like as (b) political oppression. You told a joke she didn’t find funny? You’re a misogynist who is engaged in the “dehumanization of women.” It is never enough for a feminist to say, “Your behavior is rude” or even just, “I don’t like you.” No, the man she doesn’t like is a misogynist, and his rudeness is a civil rights violation.