The new migratory space in Southern Europe: the case of Colombian sex workers in Spain

Author(s):  
Laura Oso
Keyword(s):  
2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lyllymar Colon ◽  
Vivian Tamayo-Agrait ◽  
Isaedmarie Febo ◽  
Paola Piovanetti ◽  
Michelle Pico ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 90 (5) ◽  
pp. 567-577 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Alschech ◽  
Cheryl Regehr ◽  
Carmen H. Logie ◽  
Michael C. Seto

1970 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 09
Author(s):  
Shinta Kristianti

Transmission of HIV-AIDS in Indonesia is growing fast, one of the triggers are due to risky sexual behavior, including sexual behavior in FSW’s clients. This study aimed to analyze the factors that influence the behavior of condom use on the FSW’s clients in Semampir Kediri. This study used quantitative methods to the design of explanatory research with cross sectional approach. A triangulation of qualitative data used to support the results of quantitative analysis were excavated from WPS and pimps as a cross check answers FSW’s clients, the means used was to in-depth interviews and FGDs (Focus Group Discussion) on the FSW and pimps. Sample size was 66 people. Univariate data analysis, with chi-square bivariate and multivariate logistic regression. Results showed most respondents (71.2%) behave consistent in using condoms.Variables related to condom use behavior in FSW were knowledge, perception of vulnerability, severity perceived, benefits perceived, barriers perceived and perceived ability to self (self-efficacy), the availability of condoms, condom regulation, support of friends and support of FSW. Support of friend was the most influential variable on the practice of using condoms to FSW’s clients and the OR value was 19.218.; Key words: female sex workers (FSW), FSW’s clients, condom, consistent 


2016 ◽  
pp. 425-434
Author(s):  
Dan Michman

The percentage of victimization of Dutch Jewry during the Shoah is the highest of Western, Central and Southern Europe (except, perhaps of Greece), and close to the Polish one: 75%, more than 104.000 souls. The question of disproportion between the apparent favorable status of the Jews in society – they had acquired emancipation in 1796 - and the disastrous outcome of the Nazi occupation as compared to other countries in general and Western European in particular has haunted Dutch historiography of the Shoah. Who should be blamed for that outcome: the perpetrators, i.e. the Germans, the bystanders, i.e. the Dutch or the victims, i.e. the Dutch Jews? The article first surveys the answers given to this question since the beginnings of Dutch Holocaust historiography in the immediate post-war period until the debates of today and the factors that influenced the shaping of some basic perceptions on “Dutch society and the Jews”. It then proceeds to detailing several facts from the Holocaust period that are essential for an evaluation of gentile attitudes. The article concludes with the observation that – in spite of ongoing debates – the overall picture which has accumulated after decades of research will not essentially being altered. Although the Holocaust was initiated, planned and carried out from Berlin, and although a considerable number of Dutchmen helped and hid Jews and the majority definitely despised the Germans, considerable parts of Dutch society contributed to the disastrous outcome of the Jewish lot in the Netherlands – through a high amount of servility towards the German authorities, through indifference when Jewish fellow-citizens were persecuted, through economically benefiting from the persecution and from the disappearance of Jewish neighbors, and through actual collaboration (stemming from a variety of reasons). Consequently, the picture of the Holocaust in the Netherlands is multi-dimensional, but altogether puzzling and not favorable.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document