On one hand I agree, but on the other many people do not believe "slavery" exists anymore. It would be a hard sell to get everyone onboard to support this cause with that rhetoric.

I've run into this when I've discussed sex slavery with people. The word slavery visibly doesn't sit well with some as a description for what's happening.

In the end, what matters is that support is brought against trafficking and slavery.

It seems odd to me we've settled on the weirdly, well, misleading "trafficking" to describe prostitution. It sounds like people who don't like prostitution are trying to lump in a relatively small percentage of women who were forced into the trade with women who chose it over other options.

...Who's saying that? The article is specifically about forced sex slavery.

I dunno. I've been thinking about this a bit, being an awkward tech-y guy in an environment where the knee-jerk reaction to that profession is face-searing hatred.

Actual human trafficking, which does exist in the industry today, rules it out. It just has to; theft of agency is about as bad a crime as I can think of.

But where can you stand on practical regulation? How do you draw a line that separates people who see it as a decent living all things considered, and those who detest the idea but have no other available means of affording to live? Would it even stop the issue of slavery and trafficking, if the laws were only local and on a small scale?

I dunno. But it's definitely thorny, so I'm guessing I'll have moved out of this tech blast zone by the time any of it gets resolved.