More punter-excusing

Oh poor Baleno - he does struggle with things - facts, forums, maths, knowledge - but men's right to buy to buy sex is, of course, paramount. That's what's important. We must keep arguing that.

for the fab feminists.

Sabrina I think baleno struggles with facts he can't accept. The post where he asks the question starts with a comment right at me

Er... I wasn't talking to you actually.

Yes you were. You're on a public forum, and flora is part of the discussion.

Do men have the right to sell women's bodies for sex? Because that is what happens at the moment.

Do you know where that happens less? Sweden. Sweden is not seen as an attractive place for sex traffickers and pimps. Do you know how they know that? Wiretapping information gained by the Swedish police has told them that - from the sex-traffickers themselves - Sweden is not an attractive place for traffickers because of the Nordic law.

And if no answer comes, then I will know the answer. - well, quite.

Look I know you're worried as being exposed as either a low-life or not knowing what you are talking about (although you are doing rather a good job yourself on the other thread). I'll help you out here. If you say you are not a punter, I will ask you how you feel able to make this statement:

Hence, yes, I am a neutral observer. My underlying opinions and ideologies have been formed by listening to people who knew better than me.

Who were you listening to and why? What was the context?

You opened this by trying to give added weight to your opinions vis-a-vis the opinions expressed by a number of women on this board. It's fair enough for me to ask you to back this up before carrying on.

Nope I asked my question first: are you a punter?

Er... I wasn't talking to you actually. Fine, I will wait for someone else's answer. And if no answer comes, then I will know the answer.

Nope I asked my question first: are you a punter?

Turn for what? I won't sway the discussion.

Nobody has answered to my question, which is related to this discussion. I am repeating it here:

"I don't believe that men have the right to buy sex. To me, whether men have the right to buy sex or not, is a moot point. What I believe is that women own their bodies and have the right to sell sex, if they wish so. Then men should be allowed to buy sex, otherwise it doesn't make sense. If you make buying sex a crime then you are effectively denying women a right. You are denying a right indirectly but you are denying it nonetheless. Hence, please answer: do you think that women own their bodies and have the right to sell sex, if they wish so? "

It's not that hard, I'll even go first.

My opinions and ideologies have been informed by:

• listening to women who have been in prostitution, including women close to me whom I knew before they started (they had a variety of different experiences and some of them favour decriminalisation or legalisation and some of them favour the Nordic model)
• reading various studies and reports both pro-Nordic, pro-decrim/legalisation and neutral (as you can see from reading various other threads where I have discussed them)
• reading mainstream media which is entranced with the happy hooker myth and gives a wide platform to the people you say you are listening to.
• reading legal arguments in leading cases relating to prostitution
• watching the evidence from various sides of the argument at the Northern Ireland committee hearings
• applying feminist thinking on the impact of male dominated society on women individually and women as a class.

I have never bought or sold sex but I have been propositioned by men to sell sex several times.

Now it's your turn.

Hence, yes, I am a neutral observer. My underlying opinions and ideologies have been formed by listening to people who knew better than me.

You brought this into play. If you are a punter it directly affects this statement and your opinions expressed on this thread. Please answer, it won't take long.

So are you a punter?

If I answer no, then you guys will attack me for not knowing what I am talking about. If I answer yes, then you will attack me for being a lowlife. Hence my answer is: It doesn't matter and let's not deviate from our discussion. We are discussing women's rights here. If you think you can contribute then please do so. Otherwise, please contribute wherever you think you can.

Of course he is Florafox, he won't admit it now, and will come across all pearl clutchy about you even thinking such a thing about him. Then about 20 pages in, he'll admit that he IS a punter, but that he's a nice one, who 'knows' via his superpowers that the women he's paid to fuck are all happy to be there and think he's a special 'client'. Then a few pages on, he'll admit that one had cried to him about how awful she feels about it all, so he'll let her pet his dog and when she's calmed down a bit, fucked her anyway.

It's pretty much how it always goes.

So are you a punter?

How can you be a "neutral observer" when you believe that men have the right to buy sex? That's not a neutral opinion.

Being a neutral observer does not mean having neutral opinions. If the reports I read showed a different reality, then I would have different opinions. That means to be neutral: you let your opinion be driven by facts. As neutral as humanly possible, I mean.

I don't believe that men have the right to buy sex. To me, whether men have the right to buy sex or not, is a moot point. What I believe is that women own their bodies and have the right to sell sex, if they wish so. Then men should be allowed to buy sex, otherwise it doesn't make sense. If you make buying sex a crime then you are effectively denying women a right. You are denying a right indirectly but you are denying it nonetheless. Hence, please answer: do you think that women own their bodies and have the right to sell sex, if they so wish?

Why is your opinion neutral?

You said that my opinion was biased because you assumed it was based on a small sample. And you didn't give me reason to believe otherwise of you. If we have both read reports from reliable sources, and such reports conflicts, then the problem is that we should determine what the reality is before making snap judgements.

Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, parts of Australia, Thailand. All places where prostitution is practised legally and openly. Are you saying that legalisation does not remove stigma? What stigma do punters face?

I can't think of any client of prostitutes that would like to be outed. The fact that prostitution is legal means that it is tolerated, not that it is socially acceptable to practice it in the open. When we will see politicians running for office while flaunting their engagement in the sex trade, then I will agree that there is no stigma anymore.

Baleno are you or have you ever been a punter?

I should have written:

"Almost everybody has money concerns (unless they are rich, that is). That is why people look for jobs, and keep jobs they hate."

From what I have read, the majority of people are dissatisfied with their jobs. Should we criminalize employers?

I suppose Baleno that you have only met women in prostitution who entered prostitution as adults, without money concerns, mental health issues, and free from addiction, precarious immigration status or coercion of any form, is that right? And yet that is not selection bias?

Er... no. I have read a few reports from independent agencies.

Almost everybody has money concerns. That is why people look for jobs. Some people are not qualified enough to earn the amount of money they want, or need, without engaging in prostitution.

You are not a neutral observer, so drop the accusations of bias. We each have underlying opinions and ideologies.

Hence, yes, I am a neutral observer. My underlying opinions and ideologies have been formed by listening to people who knew better than me.

Here is another issue. Reports can be anonymous. Crimestoppers encourages anonymous reporting.

Then we need more awareness campaigns.

Punters have no difficulty speaking and writing publicly. Punternet is rife with public sharing of information - no comments about reporting to police, yet they don't feel enough stigma not to complain about the service.

Er... Writing on a public forum, behind your computer screen, doesn't mean writing publicly. It doesn't impact your image in real life.

Punters are not stigmatised by society.

What? Were do you live, Whenthered? I know no society where hiring prostitutes is publicly accepted. People with high status may get away with it, but it impacts their image nonetheless.

@Whenthered

There are a wide variety of opinions among those in prostitution. Of the women who have been in prostitution that I have met, they are all in the latter group.

Selection bias at work, maybe?

A desire to distance oneself from one's past to elicit sympathy?

Although I have read and heard a number of instances when a punter has suspected the woman he has just hired has been trafficked, coerced or is in some other way vulnerable, I still have yet to hear of a single instance where a punter has reported a concern.

I can believe that. Prostitution and hiring prostitutes carries a social stigma. Hence, clients may egoistically avoid reports to protect their privacy and social status. Prostitutes have complained about the same issue: they are unlikely to report abuse because they don't want to be outed. I think that if reports were anonymous and we had awareness campaigns, the numbers would be different.

@WhentheRed

Opinions on what? What are "sex workers"? That definition is a very broad one and includes "managers".

I would have rather said "prostitutes", but regrettably this term has a negative connotation. But if I have to use a more precise language...

What about survivor groups, do their opinions count?

Sure. What about voluntary prostitutes? Shouldn't their opinions count as well? Hence, let's listen to BOTH survivor groups and prostitutes' rights groups because BOTH have rights.

My definition of exploiter includes all pimps and punters.

Prostitutes do not think of their clients as exploiters, since clients are the source of their income. Dismissing prostitutes' opinions means dismissing prostitutes as human beings who are capable of thinking for themselves.