Secret seducers

Abstract

At the end of the 1990s, a moral panic erupted in the Netherlands about the phenomenon of what came to be known as 'loverboys'. The suspicion was that a growing number of Dutch girls were being groomed by handsome young men who employed all sorts of devious methods to prepare their girlfriends for life as a prostitute. Stories about a new generation of pimps, often of Moroccan origin, regularly appeared in the Dutch media. In this article, based on ethnographic fieldwork on pimps operating in the red-light district of Amsterdam, we describe the ways in which these young men operate and how they justify their behaviour. On the basis of empirical research we intend to present a more realistic picture of what goes on in the prostitution industry and highlight the discrepancy between what is reported in the media and what is actually happening in the prostitution sector. We also examine the background to the moral panic about loverboys and the ways in which these young men were supposedly able to induce many young girls into becoming prostitutes.For more than a decade now, the Netherlands has been plagued by the criminal practices of what are referred to as 'loverboys'. This English term has a unique definition in Dutch: loverboys are young men who use their seduction skills with the aim of exploiting young girls as prostitutes. What we are actually dealing with here are ordinary pimps and when we take a closer look at the modus operandi of these young men, we find that there is nothing new under the sun. The story about a new generation of pimps, often of Moroccan origin, who are busy grooming young and innocent girls for prostitution that continues to pop up in the Dutch media, appears to be little more than an urban legend.

Role of money mules in money laundering and financial crimes a discussion through case studies

“…However, “this successful global industry is a frequent venue of cybercrime, which poses serious problems for matchmaking services and daters worldwide” (ibid). These scams can take place either online via an E-love network followed with e-mails or physically via what is known in The Netherlands as a “lover boy” scam (van San and Bovenkerk, 2013; Poelmans et al , 2011).…”

‘He’s not my pimp’: toward an understanding of intimate male partner involvement in female sex work at the Mexico–US border

“…While research has documented that some female sex workers are indeed victims of abusive pimps (Norton-Hawk 2004; Raphael, Reichert, and Powers 2010), variability exists even across contexts of ‘pimping’ (Staiger 2005). Some women are lured into sex work by men who are initially perceived as intimate partners but subsequently transition into pimps (van San and Bovenkerk 2013; Shannon et al 2008). In other contexts, women act as managers of other women’s sex work, offering protection and social support (Yi et al 2012).…”

Comparing intrafamilial child sexual abuse and commercial sexual exploitation of children: A systematic literature review on research methods and consequences

“…Loverboys, as they are called in the Netherlands, are a specific type of human traffickers, who distinguish themselves from other human traffickers through their distinctive exploitation methods. That is, they groom their victims by feigning romantic interest and then exploit the minor in the sex industry (van San & Bovenkerk, 2013;Verwijs, Mein, Goderie, Harreveld, & Jansma, 2011). Outside the Netherlands, this phenomenon is known by different descriptions, like pimps, child sex T trafficking, domestic minor sex trafficking (DMST), commercial sexual exploitation of children (CSEC) and feigned romantic relationships (Barnitz, 1998;Clawson & Goldblatt Grace, 2007;UNODC, 2014;van San & Bovenkerk, 2013;Verwijs et al, 2011).…”

“…That is, they groom their victims by feigning romantic interest and then exploit the minor in the sex industry (van San & Bovenkerk, 2013;Verwijs, Mein, Goderie, Harreveld, & Jansma, 2011). Outside the Netherlands, this phenomenon is known by different descriptions, like pimps, child sex T trafficking, domestic minor sex trafficking (DMST), commercial sexual exploitation of children (CSEC) and feigned romantic relationships (Barnitz, 1998;Clawson & Goldblatt Grace, 2007;UNODC, 2014;van San & Bovenkerk, 2013;Verwijs et al, 2011). All terms are referring to the same phenomenon: commercial sexual exploitation of a minor with the goal of financial gain.…”

“…Some elements in the victimization of CSEC are specific for this type of abuse, which could have distinguishing effects on victims of CSEC compared to victims of sexual abuse without commercial exploitation. These specific elements are: 1) the high level of betrayal, since the victim saw/sees the human trafficker/ loverboy as their boyfriend (van San & Bovenkerk, 2013;Verwijs et al, 2011); 2) the high level of dependency, due to the isolating process that often accompanies the recruitment of a potential victim and the blackmailing that regularly comes after that (Humanitas PMW, 2008;Nationaal Rapporteur Mensenhandel, 2009); and 3) the high level of abuse, since CSEC is associated with repeated sexual abuse by multiple (known and unknown) offenders (Greenbaum, 2014;Verwijs et al, 2011).…”