Friday, 16 February 2018

Rejecting moral relativity is not Puritanism

I don't want to ban the Lithuanian hookers who hang-out in the marble-clad cocktail bars of the 4* 'international' hotels around Euston Road. I certainly don't want to ban grid girls, darts dollies or the lady in the bikini on cards of peanut packs. I don't want to stop Max Mosley hiring tag-teams of prostitutes to cater for his deviant S&M sexual preferences (though because he funds the fake press regulator Impress, I do want to retain the right to report on his activities). And as some of my most stably married friends met whilst working together, I certainly don't want to stop office flirting or tea-room romance. 

But I do want to stop 'aid workers' in their 40s, 50s and God help us '60s using their positions of power and trust to sexually use very young girls from some of the most vulnerable, poor, disadvantaged and helpless places in the world. Paying women for sex is not a good thing, but where there is a degree of power equality and willingness on both sides it degrades only those involved. This is not the case in aid zones, in places where the UN flag flies, where the gross disparity in situation of the abuser and the consentor to sex makes it, in my eyes, rape. And please don't tell me that 'those girls look older than 13' or 'those African girls mature quickly, you know' - it makes you part of the problem. 

When I look into the helpless eyes of a person barely out of childhood who has nothing, absolutely nothing, and is dependent utterly on external aid and assistance, I really do believe that any man who harms or abuses such a one is better off throwing himself into the sea with a large rock tied to his neck. They certainly have no place in our society or that of any other people. They are pariah dogs, outcasts, lower than snakeshit. 

The UN has seen ill-disciplined African 'peacekeepers' rape very young girls to a disgraceful extent in DRC and other intervention zones, but at least has a Code of Practice which just needs to be enforced. Unlike Oxfam, which has said in recent days that it does not prohibit its field staff from using local prostitutes on human rights grounds. This is reason enough for DFID to withhold all funding from Oxfam until it not only imposes this COP on all its field staff, but has the structure to enforce it. If Oxfam aid workers want to use whores, they can wait until they get back to London, Brussels or Copenhagen. 


Cascadian said...

You did not mention boys.

And lets not target Oxfam only, Milliband/Clintons International Rescue is just as bad, as is Medicins sans Frontieres and no doubt many, many others.

Government funding of all charities should be terminated, they all seem to have lost their way since they ditched the CHRISTIAN charity model.

formertory said...

Government funding of all charities should be terminated

Agreed completely.

I now only give to The Salvation Army, for their work with those in this country who need help. I don't know for sure that they're free of the taint of taking advantage of those they're helping, or of sharp business practice, but I have absolute confidence that they are. I'm not a practising Christian (just a human, thanks) but I do see the point Cascadian is making and as I see it you don't need the old-bloke-with-the-beard flummery if you accept the values.

If only one could say the same of Certain Other Religious Groups.

DeeDee99 said...

I very much doubt that this vile, exploitative behaviour has been restricted to Oxfam.

The professional aid workers move from one charity to another. In fact Oxfam has admitted it allowed its disgraced employee to resign with dignity so he could take up a role at another aid organisation.

I expect the whole sector is tainted - just like the Hollywood scandal was not restricted to Weinstein and when the lid was lifted, "respectable" virtue-signallers like Spacey were found to have been indulging in similar practices.

The Aid Industry needs complete reform: simply banning exploitative men from using local prostitutes is only a tiny element of what is needed. The whole "business model" should change. Flying hordes of well paid, well-fed, luxuriously-accommodated "aid workers" into a disaster zone/very poor country - lording it over the local population is inappropriate. It's hardly surprising that when they are placed in a position of power, some of them exercise a "droit de seigneur."

The Big Money our Government has been shovelling at the likes of Oxfam has corrupted them. And THAT's where the reform should start. Cut the money they receive and make them change.

right-writes said...

I would say that by digging it out of the churches, schools and orphanages here, we have left these people no alternative other than to try their hand at aid work.

Next thing is to reduce aid money, stolen from our pockets by our irresponsible government, then we will see how much aid gets to these children in those poor countries.

Once we have done that, we can offer to assist with the construction of useful infrastructure, like roads, power stations, docks, airstrips, schools, along with a strict policy of reducing immigration from these current hell-holes into the west.

I would say that would be a good start.

The morals will begin to take care of themselves, and the globalists will just have to put up with a bit more localism.

john cheshire said...

Taxpayers money should not be given to charities.

Once a charity has reached a certain gross income, it should be treated as a business fur tax purposes.

All charities above a certain gross income should have to pay business rates just like any other business.

And no fiddling by making each local shop a separate charity that just happens to have the same national or international name.

DADAD said...

right-writes; I believe the correct term is not hell-hole, but shithole.

Poisonedchalice said...

Are any of you surprised by all this? I am definitely not surprised. The only thing that has surprised me is the length of time it has taken to come to light; I can only conclude that various factions have colluded very hard to keep these vile practices hidden from the public.

And guess what? The left-liberals are, even now, trying in some thinly disguised way to defend Oxfam and other charities by issuing statements such as "oh this will only have a bad effect on the people it's meant to help". No mention at all that bone fide charity givers; those that really want to see their money go to help people who really need it, have a choice. You don't have to give to Oxfam to do good.

Here was my choice and the choice of my family. One year we decided, after research, to not give birthday and Christmas presents to each other in that year and instead club together to help a Kenyan village directly. Through a project group we donated the money to buy a herd of goats, dig a water well and construct a sanitation block. The project group (a charity) took only 2% of the money donated to administer to the work done. And we knew the work had been completed because one of the villagers had moved to Britain to find work and he worked as a waiter in a local hotel. His delighted family sent pictures which he showed us on progress and the completed works.

People have a choice and they should exercise that choice by voting with their wallets.

Ed P said...

All these fake charities (i.e., ones receiving 10% or more of their funding from the taxpayer) are corrupt. And that utter shit Clegg's quid pro quo for propping up Cameron by giving 0.7% of GDP to international bribery, sorry, aid, has exacerbated the problems and funded more, similar corruption abroad.

Cull The Badgers said...

But we must not take our eyes off the OXFAM ball. They did it and they must be punished for it. We must not make excuses for them.

Cull The Badgers said...

Me too.

Anonymous said...

"But I do want to stop 'aid workers' in their 40s, 50s and God help us"

Let's just stop State aid! The West started out with good intentions with CMS and such like, then the 'aid' industry exploded, until the West has it through its collective mind that we owe these 'shitholes' for colonialism.

Now, living under the colonial yolk in the Belgian empire was pretty terrible if you happened to be black.

But that wasn't true of the harsh British Empire - remember the British ruled themselves pretty severely and there was no universal franchise even for Men until 1918 and then you had to be 21.

Anyway, 'aid' has now metastasised into a cancer.

It's not as if Glasgow high rise estates are the workers paradise.

Doug Shoulders said...

Also the abuse of the coal face charity workers. Those little old women who stand spend all day in a smelly shop and who wouldn’t believe you, if you told them, where the money goes.
Charity work is a good number for those that haven’t the skills or nonce to get a proper fucking job. (No pun intended).

Anonymous said...

Doug Shoulders: " Also the abuse of the coal face charity workers."

According to the daily mail, one of the senior shop managers tried to persuade the woman who wanted to lay charges against her assailant, not to.

Punchline. The guy in question had allegedly assaulted the shop manager too.

Women, bless.

Oldrightie said...

My target for the spotlight is those civil servant Mandarins who have happily covered this all up. No doubt indulging themselves of the "goodies" on tax payer funded "fact finding" jamborees. Probably very well looked after by the various despots who run, for their own depraved gratification, these shit-holes.

Dave_G said...

Well... power corrupts and absolute power etc.

Scrutiny. Independent monitoring, on site, permanent and with the overseer having 100% access and control.

Oh, and the overseer to be a married (with kids) woman of maturity and experience (matronly if you will).

Then ban all taxpayer support and insist all charities publish, in large, clearly-identifiable print, their percentage of funds that actually reach the intended recipients on ALL publications and ALL advertising.

Cascadian said...

It is very strange, how we are all getting worked up by this revelation, when similar revelations about under-aged rape and torture in Rotherham, Newcastle, Oxford, Bradford and perhaps another hundred cities around yUcK did not elicit similar actions from the government to defund the city councils, police forces, social services etc who were complicit in the outrages.

Is it perhaps the case that black lives matter but white working-class lives are quite expendable? Perhaps a comment from is required. Indeed was not Ms DisMay the home secretary while all this was being revealed?

Anonymous said...

Push, pull, no birth control other than at the end of a gun?

I wonder, and subsidized by western taxpayers, on the same ships and planes chartered to deliver aid, does the arms industry reserve cargo space for arms and military materiel destined for tyrants running (into the ground) - these said 'shitholes'?

On the one hand we give albeit enforced 'life saving' and on the other 'our' political claques allow to take it away.

Until Africans learn to fend for themselves, the boats to EUrope will never stop.

Is that what we are forced to pay for and as we see - it is, then our executive and across the administration - are just shitkickers pretending philanthropy and that's the joke - isn't it?

MadNumismatist said...

IMO these scum are worse than Gary Glitter going to Cambodia or the nonces that buy ice cream vans. Stalking disasters zones and targeting the most vulnerable people on earth is beyond the pale. Will they be hounded, ostracized, publicly reviled? No, their common purpose alum will soon have them in another quango, still on the cocktail circuit, still on six figure salaries curtsey of taxpayers.

Unknown said...

I disagree - I think you are being selective and 'holier than thou'.

Why do you feel that aid workers hiring prostitutes back in their home countries is somehow less offensive than when they are overseas?

Are you so naive that you believe that prostitution did not exist in these countries before the aid workers arrived?

Sex workers, wherever they live, have made hard choices and should be respected. If they were not coerced, they should be free to make a living like everyone else.

Raedwald said...

Unknown - Utterly wrong on so many levels.

14 year old girls in war zones, natural disasters, civil breakdown are not and can never be 'sex workers' - they are victims. Sexually abusing them is rape.

If you don't get it, you're part of the problem - get castrated, mate.

jack ketch said...

Seems nothing much has changed since the Victorian age of 'social reformers' and general 'do-gooders', who felt it was their Christian Duty to 'save' fallen women ,exploited children and the poor heathens in Africa by abusing them.

Cuffleyburgers said...

So right Radders