Where is the evidence that Rachel Lloyd is less than trustworthy and sincere? Perhaps the allegations against her are well supported, but, I should like to know who the people (or journalists?) are who have denounced her, and how they found what they found. (One thing I love about the United States of America--and there's much I don't love about our culture--is our widely held belief in the principle that we all SHOULD be innocent till proven guilty. Not all earthlings live with that wonderful little piece of justice, so among ourselves, as we pronounce someone guilty, we might adhere to the principle of telling how we know.)

@ withheld from New York, NY

That's interesting stuff, I'm glad we're able to agree that bringing sex work out into the open is one of the best ways to give woman control over their own lives. As for Rachel, I have to disagree - doesn't it strike you as rather twisted that she's so filled with righteous indignation at pimps who traffic in teen girls, keeping their money and inevitably abandon them when she essentially does the same thing, i.e. takes a LOT of money from the government, pimps out the lurid stories that these young girls live 24/7 and then discards them if they fail to take the "right" course?

Does Lloyd take any responsibility for them? No. Does she help them? Maybe, we certainly have no evidence that she does or is more effective than typical social service solutions like Foster Care.

She clearly helps herself to a lot of money and fame, trotting out sleazy stories and exploiting already exploited girls with her books and movies, all to feed the Rachel Lloyd hype machine. I wonder how the girls she uses in her movies and writes about in her books feel about having their personal agony trotted out to help Lloyd SELL her image.

She's been at this a long time before she finally hit on "trafficking" as the political buzzword that would keep politicians and grant money rolling in, but where are the results? I see nothing but an ego driven PR bunko artist.

She could have had these grants for her work without also building up a whole industry, a very lucrative one for all concerned, on the back of what is a truly shameful state of affairs. But real change will not come from a "social entrepreneur", a profiteer of human misery more concerned with appearing "good" than doing any "good".

Nothing changes without outrage, leave it to someone like lloyd to "manage" expectations and provide a conduit for endless public $ with no accountability, no transparency and no evidence of success, unless she defines success as career and $$$, which she probably does.

@ withheld from New York, NY

That's interesting stuff, I'm glad we're able to agree that bringing sex work out into the open is one of the best ways to give woman control over their own lives. As for Rachel, I have to disagree - doesn't it strike you as rather twisted that she's so filled with righteous indignation at pimps who traffic in teen girls, keeping their money and inevitably abandon them when she essentially does the same thing, i.e. takes a LOT of money from the government, pimps out the lurid stories that these young girls live 24/7 and then discards them if they fail to take the "right" course?

Does Lloyd take any responsibility for them? No. Does she help them? Maybe, we certainly have no evidence that she does or is more effective than typical social service solutions like Foster Care.

She clearly helps herself to a lot of money and fame, trotting out sleazy stories and exploiting already exploited girls with her books and movies, all to feed the Rachel Lloyd hype machine. I wonder how the girls she uses in her movies and writes about in her books feel about having their personal agony trotted out to help Lloyd SELL her image.

She's been at this a long time before she finally hit on "trafficking" as the political buzzword that would keep politicians and grant money rolling in, but where are the results? I see nothing but an ego driven PR bunko artist.

She could have had these grants for her work without also building up a whole industry, a very lucrative one for all concerned, on the back of what is a truly shameful state of affairs. But real change will not come from a "social entrepreneur", a profiteer of human misery more concerned with appearing "good" than doing any "good".

Nothing changes without outrage, leave it to someone like lloyd to "manage" expectations and provide a conduit for endless public $ with no accountability, no transparency and no evidence of success, unless she defines success as career and $$$, which she probably does.

As a former sex worker (no name please) who would never have chosen a pimp, I laud Rachel Lloyd's work, but the components of this vast social problem--the exploitation of prostitutes by others-- are poorly understood by the public (and I doubt ignorance benefits anyone). If the pimp/ho' relationship were (always, usually) out and out slavery, it might be much easier to do something about it. However, it's not true that prostitutes are always turned out by men, and many pimps use no violence and little coercion since "their" workers are so willing. It's little known, but, women prostitutes make "square" men into pimps very, very often; they want to pay for companionship, instruction and management, the illusion of a family and a lottery ticket: "Will I be the one to marry him someday, have his baby and get the jackpot (from all the others) he's getting now?" Try to tell a believer that they're buying too many lottery tickets and that the odds are lousy. Whether we like it or not, she sometimes wins; pimps do sometimes choose a member of the stable and "square up," and though I strongly disapprove, the relationship is sometimes compellingly loving and human (after all, some freed slaves chose to remain with their so-called masters after the Union army marched through). It's also true sometimes (much too much of the time) that prostitutes are so ignorant, childish and utterly incapable of taking care of themselves that their exploiters are keeping them out of the gutter (and since nobody but nobody wants these formerly dirty, thieving, pitiful fools, Rachel's role in giving them an alternative other than the gutter or a pimp is a wonderful thing). Some pimps are as cruel and unjust as slavers, some (confoundingly) resemble high paid managers, and since--I believe-- prostitution is an inevitable part of the relationship between men and women, to make prostitution a legalized business would be the best way to provide regulation and make sure the ugliest and most conscienceless exploiters would tend to fade into the background. The fact that society is in denial of the fact that prostitution exists, can't be stopped, and sees women who have prostituted as stupid, immoral and tainted, pushing prostitution underground, contributes greatly to the desperation of these women; it would be infinitely better if they could communicate easily and openly with the outside world.

@ DTorres from Nathan Strauss Projects.

Yes, Lloyd is great at talking that stuff, you know it's the "glamorization" of this or the "sexualization" of that and finally the "victimization" and on and on to other "ations" ad infinitum. But nothing changes.

In the end GEMS pays out half it's revenues in salaries to employees, spends another 500K on fund raising and management, misc expenses and the girls get whatever is left after they sock enough cash to keep going into the next grant season. That is some bizness model.

In video #5 of Very Young Girls,
in my opinion, Rachel let down Ebony.
Because Rachel went to Florida,
in order to bring Ebony back.
Eventually Ebony did come back,
but walked into a bad scene,
Rachel wasn't there.

Ebony was very vulnerable, she needed a lot of support and I don't think that
Rachel or her group GEMS are
equipped with the necessary personnel,
to deal with somebody like Ebony.

Rachel is doing a good job, in so far
as she can, but there needs to be
much more of a back up for the GEMS
program.

Bringing in professional social workers,
psychologist specialized in dealing
with this population.
More options available for the girls.

I don't think GEMS has that,
from what I could see from the video,

Rachel is doing the best she can do,
with what she has, but she needs a lot more to be effective.
Very Young Girls.

@ Chelsea from Austin, TX

How kind of you! You're certainly more coherent than Lloyd's other raving attack dog ... I've reviewed the 990's and I have to say, it's a bit troubling. Yes, you're right Lloyd ONLY makes 78K as exec director, but we all know she makes many times more than that as a speaker, it's how you get over in public life, much like a politician who pulls down a gov salary and then "consults" after leaving office.

Since this group only exists for the enrichment and aggrandizement of Lloyd and her employees 78K is probably too much - but why do I say that?

Well, according to the last 990 total revenue for this "Gems" is exactly 2 million, all gubment $ btw (99%). Of this 2 mill they spent $1,105,000 on salaries and employee bennies ALONE.

Their Total Program Expenses (which includes EVERYTHING they spend on these girls, from lawyers to housing to the salaries of the people who work to "help" them, and whatever else) totals ONLY $1,243,000. What does that mean?

Well, the math is pretty simple, take away the salaries from the Total Program expense and you get a measly $138K spent directly on these girls, out of a total revenue of 2 million!

I look forward to reading the next 990, I'm sure the board will vote her another raise, she's never missed one despite the recession, don't worry Lloyd you'll hit 100k in no time!

Very Young Girls - Rachel Lloyd - GEMS-Video in 6 Parts

1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=myzVv2rsY-o

2
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1BAGmDEjS0

3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRQAmY9_Wv0

4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_z_TXFa6gI

5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qWN4axMtRrE

6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daqlD8-R6rc

Mr. Bad- Btw- Charity Navigator focuses on arund 5,500 of this country's argest public charities- of which GEMS is not- which makes sense when there are more than 100,000 501 c(3) organizations in the US. So there are a LOT of 501 c 93) organizations that don't have filings on Charity Navigator but are transparent and do have their 990 filings avaialbe on Guidestar.

It would have taken you about three minutes to find the 990 forms that you kept saying were being hidden if you had just actually tried to look at more than one source. Remember Guidestar next time you are ready to bash an organization for something it did not do. :)

Mr. Bad- the 990s for GEMS are actually up and available to the public on Guidestar. Very easy to find if you try to look and are not coming in with an agenda. The 990s for FY 2007-09 are avaialbe- and before you start demeaning the organization for not having the FY2010 990 up- they are not up for most organizations yet.

And by the way- whikle you are accusing Rachel Lloyd of having a saalry in the six-figure range- a look at the 990s for GEMS shows that inFY 2009- she got a salary of $78,000 which is not exactly enough to live large in NYC as you accuse her of.

I work in the non-profit industry and there are a number of non-profits who do not have entries on Charity Navigator. But just a little bit of time on your part would have easily yielded the 990s for GEMS. So perhaps you should do a little bit of work yourself before you just go to one site- act like that is the only site where you can get 990s (which is patently false)- and then get ready to accuse an organization of hiding its 990s when it has in fact NOT been doing that.

Wow, somebody is VERY scared, and it's not me. Apparently because I have a different opinion on how to take on this issue I am a "pervert", that is some kind of powerful argument.

And because I pointed out that this group has ZERO transparency, financial or otherwise, and is in fact an exploitative group of white, upper class charity "entrepreneurs" appealing to the lowest common denominator with their drive by "drop a penny in the cup and feel better" mentality while co-opting the pain of poor women and girls to pull in 6 figure salaries I am in fact the jerk.

Look Lloyd, you're not a "victim", far from it, nor have you done ANYTHING to stop or otherwise reduce the scourge of childhood sex abuse or prostitution, you've merely profited from it, and in that way you're almost a s sick as the pimps and johns you're targeting. Why don't you find these "Links" to this groups financial filings and post Lloyd's salary? Just shut up and post her 501c tax filings, scan it into .pdf, and post it on an image host. Why not? let us make up our own minds.

Is your lane poverty, Black kids, the city, hip-hop, white college kids??? Or perhaps, much as you described, you probably know a small sliver of all of that.

@ Sophia (lower case "s")...

Speaking for myself only, I was not bashing the guest but simply asking her, in the parlance of the hip-hop she fraudulently claims to know so well, to "stay in her lane."

I am sure she does great work with those exploited and abused by whomever for whatever reasons but her string of unsupported suppositions about almost anything seemed opportunistic to me.

"Oh, I'm on the radio because of the work I do. I guess I better say a bunch of stuff to justify the appearance and accolades."

Stuff about poverty, Black kids, the city, hip-hop, white college kids, etc.. And to fill time, I shall generalize and make some of it up.

Yes, a we call a dentist a "doctor" but we don't want one giving us a heart transplant. She serves a sliver of society and is probably good at that and only that. She is not an expert on anything beyond her organization's doors.

Stay in your lane.

I listened to this show this afternoon while driving through NJ. Very informative. I commend Rachel Lloyd on her work. It takes a ton of courage and persevearance to do what she's doing. In a degrading, oversexualized culture it's good to know there are people like her fighting against the tide.

The sad part is that neither party - Republicans or Democrats seem to pay much attention to the issue of sex trafficing. Nor do they pay much attention to the shambles the American Foster Care system is. That system supplies a lot of young women and men who end up being trafficked. We now have a 24/7 culture of Viagra ads, porn, and Nickelodeon grooming kids to think this oversexualized culture is acceptable.

Thanks Lenny for putting this show on the air.

Dear Mr. Bad a.k.a Biggest Moron

Wow there's so much to say here. I will do my best to address the most outrageous and moronic comments.

1. "I'm not trying to "appear" intelligent, rather I have an intelligent solution to the problem,..."

What's your intelligent solution to the problem?

2."All I can find on this group in an advert for a 'Dev Coordinator" on an employment website, someone skilled in the arts of "grant writing" and founding new "institutions".

Really? Did you actually try and find anything or did you pretend to. If you google GEMS or Rachel Lloyd there is a plethora of links and news items on them.

3. Regarding your strange assertion that Rachel Lloyd, who was the victim of sexual exploitation, is somehow benefiting off of these children I can only say one thing. Take your medication and stop spinning conspiracy theory's that are baseless. Where does this come from? Turn of Rush and Beck, and pull your head out of your ass. Did you even know about GEMS prior to this segment? Maybe your a John who payed for sex with a thirteen year old girl? You got caught for being a filthy pervert and now you bitter. I mean I don't know, I'm just asking questions. I can't seem to find anything about "Mr Bad from NYC" so their must be something evil about him and his intentions.

Have something to hide???????

@ Pearse & Sophia

I'm not trying to "appear" intelligent, rather I have an intelligent solution to the problem, which you do not, instead you have a gravely vindictive attitude designed to incriminate thoughtful criticism rather than implicate the true benefactors of this sort of "activism".

Why doesn't GEM have an entry on Charity Navigator, despite being in biz for 2+ years? How much does Ms. Lloyd make as "Exec Director" per annum? No info is forthcoming on the website... I guess she is just another "angel" working for pennies, a Mother Theresa ? All I can find on this group in an advert for a 'Dev Coordinator" on an employment website, someone skilled in the arts of "grant writing" and founding new "institutions".

Nice try Lloyd,. you're a fraud, like all of the other private school grads before you, trying to make a tax free buck on the backls of poor women of color by co-opting their struggle and taking home a sweet salary in the process. Go ahead, have "pearse" and "Sophia" paste a link to your tax filings as a 501c the last few years - NPR and WNYC does... Have something to hide?

I can't believe that their are so many negative comments, directed at Rachel Lloyd and her organization. Yes obviously legalizing prostitution would lead to many positive benefits. But, lets keep in mind that Ms. Lloyd's organization and cause is directed towards child prostitution, otherwise know as child rape. I get how several of these yahoo's commenting on this ( Mr. Bad from NYC) are trying to sound intelligent by simply saying that legalizing it would some how solve everything, but that's a naive and simplistic response to a very complicated issue.

And, Jeremy R. from Brooklyn!, again you don't sound intelligent either by playing the race card. Again just like Mr. Brad, you totally missed what Ms. Lloyd was trying to say in regards to Snoop and 50 Cent. Yes obviously people have seen Snoop's show and know that he's pussy wipped. But, he still glamorizes a profession in which young girls are trafficked, abused and made to do things that no one should be made to do. Also Rachel Lloyd says that not all child prostitutes are of color. In inner cities that is more common, but in rural areas they are predominately white.

One last thing. It is super interesting that all of the vehemently negative comments all seem to come from men. God, I wonder what that says?

Wow. This segment certainly brought out quite the collection of intensely creepy comments.

12 year old prostitutes who don't deserve the title of victim, when clearly the victims are the poor old pervs being "demonized", by a woman with a similar past trying to help them, who's labeled a "poverty pimp", topped off with the modest proposal of forcible sterilization for the crime of poverty.

Justifying your vices by bashing a Good Samaritan isn't fooling anyone but yourselves, guys.

Congratulations to Rachel.

You were able to take advantage of
the opportunities that came your way,
and make it all the way from an 11 year old runaway to graduating from Marymount College.

From what you are saying, most of
the victims come from damaged
backgrounds, no one at home to
help them.

Perhaps, it is time to resort to
drastic solutions, like not allowing
people that cannot care for children,
to have children.

Make mandatory birth control a condition for qualifying for welfare,
food stamps, medicaid, etc.

@ Yigal from New Jersey

Well, sort of. I'm all for imprisoning pimps and I think the smart thing to do would be to raise the penalty level of a pimp selling underage girls to that of a sex predator, level 1, that would certainly curtail the trade a bit. Why not do that?

Creating a loophole for underage prostitutes to evade responsibility creates a hole in legal logic big enough to drive a pimp train through - freelance pimps may suffer but most of the underage prostitution is controlled by gangs who will understand how to exploit and manipulate this law to their advantage with threats and intimidation, framing rival pimps/gangs, blackmailing johns, killing uncooperative girls and all the while keeping their prostitutes on the street and making money since they are "prosecution proof".

This nice British lady is a hype master like most of the guests on this show lately, building a career on a pleasant sounding lie. She demonizes men and avoids discussing the obvious solution, which is to legalize and regulate prostitution, which would protect women and allow LE to focus on child traffickers rather than consenting adults.

But if she suggested that all of the faux feminist media attention and non-tax charity $ would dry up and she'd be back down here on earth trying to scratch out a living with the rest of us.

Unfortunately the sex trade operate under the same economical model of supply and demand and every time a female leaves her position she is replaced by a young victim. in order to protect the girls we need to remove the pimps!

Just as conservatives spoke of "poverty pimps" is the guest exploiting the sex workers she seeks to serve. Not all sex workers are victims of violence and exploitation and not all sex workers are women, of color or poor.

So many generalizations and to what end?

No, poor black kids do not see sex work or drug dealing as glamorous and sexy...they see it as a opportunity. Stop stereotyping please. Every poor kid of color would love to be Steve Jobs or Warren Buffet but those jobs are hard to come by. And no, poor black kids are not so dumb as to think that Snoop Dogg and 50 Cent are pimps...they've seen Snoop's reality show and know his wife "wears the pants" in the family. And they know that "50" sells stuff including mythology.

The HBO doc "Pimps Up, Hoes Down" did more to put pimping back into popular culture that any rapper. Know the culture, know your facts. Too many "I think[s]..." from the guest.

Shalom

Showtime's Secret Diary of a Call Girl is yet another example of the legitimization of sex trade culture - it's portrayed as a clear choice
and glamorous to boot.
And I watch it - I suspend some moral aspect of myself and watch it as fiction - yet I'm also appalled that the young actress Billy Piper finds no shame in playing this part.

I think the guest is a little misguided, well intentioned but still... Does she think that if prostitution were legalized the world of child trafficking would stand out against the legalized prostitution and be a boon to law enforcement?

We all know that at a certain age, kids are not just kids, the columbine killers were "kids" too and had also been bullied and victimized but still committed an egregious massacre. I don't equate murder with prostitution, only that moral responsibility should exist when even when a 12-13 year old does something illegal.

The notion that a teenage girl is a zombie and not picking a lifestyle which is, as the guest points out, essentially the lesser of two evils, does that really equate to "victimhood"? I don't think so. I think it's more logical to substitute a diversion program like with drug abuse, that way if it becomes simply a "free pass" with law enforcement.

The Brooklyn DA has a program: Brooklyn Sex Trafficking Unit, or BKSTU aimed at stopping the trafficking of children, he says he has arrested 9 pimps and none of them have been able to make bail

Ive noticed subtle changes in your accent.
from british to a bit of NewYorker..
to more american when she was talking about texas. Interesting insite into her psyche.

I have a kind of delicate question (just listened to the race segment on Lehrer). In the United States, to what extent does race make a girl more vulnerable? Completely aware of the stereotypes this comes from, I imagine most pimps in the US being African-American. IS this just a stereotype?

Did she hear about the teacher that Michael Bloomberg fired for admitting she was a dancer before teaching? What does she feel about people not being able to overcome the stigma of working in that kind of industry?

The Beatles got their start in Hamburg, not Munich.

More fundamentally, what do we do to extirpate the training that allows---sometimes requires---men to mistreat and abuse their sex-partners, and to choose ones weak or pliable enough to put up with it?

I don't think we can get rid of sex-work; much as is the case for drugs and religion, it is a good in the eyes of enough people that some will inevitably pay for it. What we can do is make the idea of wanting someone to abuse, wanting someone with much less power than one, and needing to see the object of desire degraded, so obnoxious to people that all but the obviously mentally ill will abjure those sentiments or at least repress them out of real-world (as opposed to fantastic and virtual) existence.

Do you think this impossible? Please then consider how acceptable (despite the entreaties of the clergy) both incest and bestiality used to be when life was mostly ignorance, toil, and grim want.