The city that allows women to sell sex

Ps you haven't changed my mind Olivia but I changed my mind from being pro legalisation to pro Nordic model so change is possible!

Olivia I am finding your posts quite unpleasant, you are telling me what you think of me as well as my views and insisting I have to see things your way or we can't discuss. Well I don't see things your way.

I don't think the majority of women and girls are in prostitution because of genuine choice and some are trafficked there to meet the huge demand of men who want to buy access to their bodies. And when we say buy we know the people really making the money are not the women themselves.

Yes that was a serious point about sex with disabled people. I don' think any woman should have to sell sex, whether the John is disabled or not. The fact you think I object on some sort of puritanical grounds is because you seem insistent on casting me in the light of some sort of moral crusader who wants to stop people having 'fun'.

I've tried to tell you that this is not the case. My judgement is not on people having sex, it is on people buying sex. If you cannot see the difference I am not sure how I can explain it more.

You don't seem to be engaging with what I am saying, rather what you think of me!

I can see your argument, you want freedom for people to do what they like? Is that the case?

But my argument is the evidence is that men doing what they like, in this situation, leads to many, many women and girls miserable lives, their physical and mental health compromised.

I know the 'boring' comment was direct at another person but personally I don't think safety of women and girls is a boring topic. Plus it is not illegal in the UK to sell sex, as far as I am aware, so canny, savy smart women who chose prostitution can do it.

"Exploitation and trafficking are about just that: exploitation and trafficking, not the act of paying someone else for sex. There is a huge difference and this really needs to be understood and accepted as fact or else we can't really discuss this. You'll then have to keep asking rhetorical questions out into the ether - such as - “why, oh why can't men do the same as us women ? “" Was that directed at me . I wasn't talking about exploitation and trafficking. I was talking about men's sense of entitlement that they should have acces to women's bodies and how women don't have that sense of entitlement. I would suggest therefore that Lust and the need for other people bodies for sexual fulfilment, will always find a way. may not be as absolute and inevitable as you think it is. Or do you think women don't feel lust?

You don't seem to have a very high opinion of men.

Olivia the more posts I see like yours the more firmly I am of the view that trying to treat prostitution as just another job simply does not wash.

This has nothing to do with religion- I am an atheist.

It has nothing to do with prudery -far from it. I had a very , shall we say, interesting sex life in my late teens and early 20s.

It doesn't even , for me, have anything to do with feminism. For me, everything I have read about it seems to show it lead to a degradation and dehuminsation of all concerned.

Re Pretty Woman - what a stupid film. There was a fascinating 10 (?) year anniversary analysis of it. It included a vice cop , a refuge worker and a minister who worked in the Sunset Strip area. They were lovely people. They had been there for years and seen it all.

The policeman started work from the point of view he didn't care what consenting adults did in private. His remit was drugs, extortion, under age girls. The refuge worker had started with the view of being supportive and non-judgemental and the minister, who obviously was the one who would find prostitution the most problematic, tried to take the same approach.

All 3 of them had come to the conclusion that prostitution was basically incompatible with human dignity. They had seen the effects. The policeman in particular thought Pretty Woman was so irresponsible it should have been banned.

I was just thinking about the ole 'severely disabled people need/deserve sex too' line. Okay, ignoring for the moment the idea (that some disabled people might find offensive, or indeed, part of the very problem with the way we view disabled people in the first place!) that people would never have sex with a disabled person anyway...........And then I thought of Stephen Hawking, who seems to have quite an active marital and family life (2 wives and 3 children). I'll admit in his case, people are perhaps more likely to believe the 'I love him for his mind' line....................

Okay, so even if you did feel sorry for a disabled person, who might rightly resent the idea of a pity fuck, what is it about paying for it that makes it better? The power relationship that being a consumer in a capitalist society gives you. And a power that men have had over women for centuries...........

Like it or not, prostitution and sex work, or surrogacy, entail use of and violation of anothers bodily autonomy in a way ordinary paid work does not. Paid work itself is problematic enough. But given the history and continued existence of the patriarchy, 'sex work' and paid surrogacy are a step too far for me. Yes, surrogacy done in the name of love by a relative or close friend is fine and laudable -- but just as we avoid paid organ donation, and paid surrogacy (especially of the overseas women rent-a-womb kind), so I think we should avoid allowing paying for sex. Because surrogacy, organ donation, and prostitution just aren't like other paid work. And in particular those which are primarily concerned with the bodily integrity of women (surrogacy and prostitution).

First off scallops. Men do not 'buy women's bodies' -- OK? A sex worker doesn't sell her body, she/he leases it for a short period. No one is buying their soul, mind, body or her life - just their participation.

Exploitation and trafficking are about just that: exploitation and trafficking, not the act of paying someone else for sex. There is a huge difference and this really needs to be understood and accepted as fact or else we can't really discuss this. You'll then have to keep asking rhetorical questions out into the ether - such as - “why, oh why can't men do the same as us women ? “

Bertrand What a silly post. You're better than that - trust me..

So you're saying that no assertive woman, working for herself, is capable of making a positive, informed decision to be a sex worker? And anyone who believes that there are some, is falsely invested with this 'Pretty Woman syndrome' you keep mentioning (a movie I've never seen btw) is that it?

Why I'm wondering do you so wish to stereotype all sex workers as abused and exploited? Is it fear that there are women different to you out there, for whom sex work offers a reasonable 'career choice' for them. That they do it because they can earn good money from it, because they are good at it, because it's a better option than the alternatives that are open to them - even, heaven forbid, that some of them might even enjoy it?

I know you mean well, but propagating fear, alarm, and supposing all sex workers are 'victims' as well as automatically associating trafficking and abuse with prostitution specifically, does absolutely nothing to help people forcibly trafficked into sex work. We need to de criminalise prostitution, recognise sex workers' rights and acknowledge that of course there is exploitation and abuse in this particular occupation. As there is in every occupation, unless there is legal protection that's stringently enforced.

We don't criminalise the entire building industry to stop the rogue builder who exploits and endangers illegal workers. What's the difference?

Anyway this is getting boring now, I'm sure you agree? I know I haven't changed your mind. Minds are well and truly made up on this subject. All we can hope for is to agree to disagree.

"What I mean is: no matter how much we try to police peoples sexual desires and their needs. Lust and the need for other people bodies for sexual fulfilment, will always find a way." Yet there is clear evidence that women do not feel the need to buy men bodies in anything like the numbers that men feel the need to buy women's bodies. So how do women manage their lusts and desires (not needs. There is no need to have sex)? And why can't men do the same?

"That doesn't amount to a moralistic judgement then for you? I suggest you just mind your own business about what other consenting adults wish to do with each other -- Is that possible? "

Happy to. How do you define consent for women in the sex trade? Or are you one of those people who think of prostitutes as either doing it part time to pay their way through their PhDs or livimg in charming flats with velvet curtains in Mayfair entertaining a few selected clients in the afternoon before drifting off to the opera with a minor Royal? Or as women who love sex sooooooo much it's a perfect career choice?

Oh, and "adult". There's another can of worms..........

Oh dear, where to start-? As for the magnificent Nordic model that you keep pulling out like Calamity Jane does her pistol .. This is not some kind of panacea I'm afraid. It still all about focusing law enforcement efforts and resources toward fighting the sex trade. Punishing consenting adults by arresting, fining and jailing people over consensual sex. If we really want to take a step forward to something that has a real chance at decreasing violence against women—we should decriminalise prostitution altogether.

If having sex to enhance someone's life is such a great thing why do people want to be paid to do it? Are you serious? Did you understand that point, or are you just so set on having the last word that you'll say anything? In some countries the state has provision for severely disabled people to engage the services of a sex worker. Your problem with that is what exactly? That they, the person paying, might just enjoy themselves for a brief period?

Oh no I'm not making judgements but
If men wanted to have sex with women maybe it should be with women who wanted to have sex with them - and not for money. That doesn't amount to a moralistic judgement then for you? I suggest you just mind your own business about what other consenting adults wish to do with each other -- Is that possible?

As for the rest of my rarefied viewpoints? I am, I'm proud to say, pro-prostitution, pro-abortion, pro the rights of trans-gender people to modify their bodies however they like and I'm also pro-legalisation of drugs. Now, with the exception of the the latter, (which we're still working on), it seems we have all those things, so I guess I win ? My viewpoints therefore, can't be that rarefied can they? You, I'm afraid will have to remain on the sidelines with your fellow puritans shouting, I'm offended - ban it all.

"This discussion is as old as the profession itself, so unless you have something new to add to it I'm afraid I've heard it all before"

Have you got anything new to add? Except "Men have needs so women have to accommodate them. Let's find a way to make sure they kill, hurt or exploit as few women as possible while satisfying their uncontrollable urges"

I don't see the slightest requirement to have a religious justification to think prostitution is bad for women and bad for society generally.

Nor is that connected with prudery.

I seem to have touched a nerve oliviaclottedcream, that was not my intention. I admit many of my comments were directed as replies to things you said, but they were not exclusively directed at you, nor meant to rile you.

But to reply to you, as best I can... re "It''s good that you managed to get a word in about 'male' violence (the only kind obviously) and child cruelty! What that's got to do with it, I've no idea?? Still the casual observer might make the link, between all 3 subject which is, I suppose your goal?

My goal was to argue that legalising prostitution was not generally good for women and girls (and men and boys) caught up in it.

Most violence does come from men. But my point about violence and child abuse was that these were and are sometimes seen as just things that happen. And I bet 100s of years ago society (men, who at the time were the only ones who could vote and who generally controlled things) may well have argued that what we would call domestic abuse or domestic violence, was just normal, nothing wrong it, and not something that could be changed. Now we see things differently. I hope one day we will about prostitution. And hope both will change.

So it's for you to make moral judgements over whether or not other people are living in a right and godly way is it?

No! I never mentioned God and there are plenty of people who do not condone paying for sex. I usually try to pepper my comments with 'IMHO' and that is what it is, but others can share that opinion.

Actually, having women in prostitution can suit a society's morals, the society can stigmatise those women, and men can use them and it kind of keeps the status quo going. This is not my viewpoint, but my point is - so called 'morality' can work in a variety of ways.

"Who's going to do this enforcing btw, you, with the help of your puritan army perhaps? Stalin and Oliver Cromwell no doubt would approve!" I'm really not sure where this is going!

I expressed an opinion that's all. That if men wanted to have sex with women maybe it should be with women who wanted to have sex with them - and not for money. I didn't say I would be 'enforcing' anything.

'feminists' - 'brooms' now who is making links!

If having sex to enhance someone's life is such a great thing why do people want to be paid to do it?

"see that people are protected... " That is my aim too, read up a bit on prostitution in New Zealand and Germany and see if you really feel people are being protected there.

"Have laws that are mature enough to recognise that this wont go away because we the offended wish it so."

I am NOT offended, I am heartbroken that women and girls, some not much older than own daughter, are used by men for sex. You may feel your position is justified as I feel my position is justified. And you may or may not be aware I am a Christian but before you get confused it is not because of any prudish view or concerns over public morality, it is the lives of people, predominantly women and girls but really all prostituted people, which concerns me.

I used to be in favour of legalising prostitution, for the sake of the women engaged in it, and then I read up on it more, and I changed my view, because I feel the Nordic model offers women the best protection.

You are welcome to make fun of my faith, and of the fact that I am a feminist, but please do be aware it is my concern for women and girls (and others) caught in prostitution that fuels my views and not any sense of prudish morality.

Olivia, if you have "heard it all before" why are you still on the thread ?

Perhaps your lofty and rarefied viewpoint will not get quite the recognition you think it deserves here. I imagine that will be very irritating for you.

Yes Bert. Indeed. We have laws to deal with all sorts of terrible things. Those laws don't stop all the terrible things happening but we don't just give up.

"As for how about men getting their shit together So it's for you to make moral judgements over whether or not other people are living in a right and godly way is it? "

Well, leaving the "godly" bit aside, that is in fact for me to do. If by "you" you mean society at large. That's why we have laws.

It''s good that you managed to get a word in about 'male' violence (the only kind obviously) and child cruelty! What that's got to do with it, I've no idea?? Still the casual observer might make the link, between all 3 subject which is, I suppose your goal?

As for how about men getting their shit together So it's for you to make moral judgements over whether or not other people are living in a right and godly way is it? Perhaps we should arrest those terrible men that aren't coming up to stretch in the way they manage their love lives? Who's going to do this enforcing btw, you, with the help of your puritan army perhaps? Stalin and Oliver Cromwell no doubt would approve!

We need to be adult about sex, and about what it is. Sex workers do an important and necessary job, whether moralists like you like it or not. How about women that use male escorts, or disabled people, for whom a sexual experience is life enhancing, emotionally and physically? Should we police their sexuality too?

As Camille Paglia said - "Simply in the Western world, pagan sexuality has survived 2000 years of Judaeo-Christian persecution and is hardly going to be defeated by a few feminists whacking at it with their brooms.”

People exploit other people and I don't like that any more than you. But it won't be legislated and policed away. All we can do is manage it. Try to limit the exploitation and see that people are protected. Have laws that are mature enough to recognise that this wont go away because we the offended wish it so..But rigorously protect sex workers and try to limit the harm done. This discussion is as old as the profession itself, so unless you have something new to add to it I'm afraid I've heard it all before

Sorry, bold did not work...

In the sixteen years since the Swedish government passed legislation known as the "Nordic Model" not one prostituted woman has been murdered by a "client;" in Germany, the body count since legalization is growing, with crushing silence and indifference.

Rather than condemning them to the sex trade, the Leeds City Council should invest in creating educational and economic opportunities, providing job training, and funding frontline service organizations that offer meaningful exit strategies for prostituted individuals, regardless of immigration status.

Must go and make the tea, but before I go....Re "and selling sex seems to be an awful way to make a living"

Well yes, it is not just me though, or you who may think this, it is the opinion of professionals too, who care about women's mental and physical health.

The Nordic or Swedish model does not criminalise women (or men) who seek to sell sex, so in that sense the chance to report crimes, access medical care, speak openly about the life and dangers, to seek an exit, etc etc is all still there. That is why I support the Nordic or Swedish model rather than decriminalising prostitution.

This article may paint a clearer picture.... it's specifically about Leeds...

www.catwinternational.org/Home/Article/649-uks-first-redlight-district-leeds-cruel-solution-to-prostitution-and-violence

"After legalizing the sex trade, Germany witnessed an increase of unspeakable violence against prostituted women at the hands of buyers of sexual acts an exponential increase in sex trafficking, and the birth of country-wide chain brothels seemingly overnight. The Netherlands is also struggling with the disastrous effects of legalization and the same scenario is unfolding under New Zealand's decriminalized regime. In the sixteen years since the Swedish government passed legislation known as the "Nordic Model" not one prostituted woman has been murdered by a "client;" in Germany, the body count since legalization is growing, with crushing silence and indifference."

Re 'respectable' I wonder if these women would feel respected? Really, respected for who they are? To assign this to women, because there is so little else out there for them is the exact opposite of respect, IMHO.

The above article goes on to say...

"Yes, the vast majority of women and transgender people bought and sold in the sex trade are in "the life" because they lack choice. They have children to feed, seek shelter, or suffer from trauma-induced ills that make escape seem impossible. Rather than condemning them to the sex trade, the Leeds City Council should invest in creating educational and economic opportunities, providing job training, and funding frontline service organizations that offer meaningful exit strategies for prostituted individuals, regardless of immigration status."

Must go got other fish to fry, literally!

CoteDAzur re ""but I think it leads to more women entering prostitution"

Re - "I don't know if that is true. Do you have any numbers that can back up that claim? (Not being aggressive, just curious)"

I know you are not being aggressive, .

It's quite hard to find an article that gives figures but if you see below in the articles there are the words used Expanded the market and in the next article "The scale effect of legalizing prostitution, i.e. expansion of the market, outweighs the substitution effect, where legal sex workers are favoured over illegal workers. On average, countries with legalized prostitution report a greater incidence of human trafficking inflows.".... see below where it is referenced....

which all suggest growth of prostitution. That might mean either more prostitutes or prostitutes seeing more clients. I would imagine in all cases this is referring to the former - more prostitutes, more women engaged in prostitution.

"Other critics of the German model point to anecdotal evidence of growing numbers of young Romanian and Bulgarian women travelling to Germany to work on the streets or even in mega-brothels."

www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-33850749

I am aware that the word in there is 'anecdotal'.

You did not ask about trafficking but as trafficking is part of the picture and as that increases with decriminalisation.....

orgs.law.harvard.edu/lids/2014/06/12/does-legalized-prostitution-increase-human-trafficking/

"Does Legalized Prostitution Increase Human Trafficking?

"Countries with legalized prostitution are associated with higher human trafficking inflows than countries where prostitution is prohibited. The scale effect of legalizing prostitution, i.e. expansion of the market, outweighs the substitution effect, where legal sex workers are favoured over illegal workers. On average, countries with legalized prostitution report a greater incidence of human trafficking inflows.
......"Criminalization of prostitution in Sweden resulted in the shrinking of the prostitution market and the decline of human trafficking inflows. Cross-country comparisons of Sweden with Denmark (where prostitution is decriminalized) and Germany (expanded legalization of prostitution) are consistent with the quantitative analysis, showing that trafficking inflows decreased with criminalization and increased with legalization."

And if you think those trafficked women are specifically prostitutes (as oposed to domestic workers etc), it really does show that decriminalising does not lead to fewer prostituted women, but to more!

Grimarse there is always room for men who want to do good! Challenge those views that say boys will be boys and that women are here for men's sexual gratification, if they pay! Or that prostitution is inevitable - it's the oldest profession you know!

But you are wise to be aware that prostitution does adversely affect women more (although there are some men and boys engaged in prostitution too).

"'safe zone' implies women would be safe there, but if they are in a room with a man who has paid money for their body and feels it's his to temporarily 'own' and use, how safe is that!"

It is actually very safe, at least in Amsterdam. These rooms are clustered together, many in the same building & on a corridor. and women look out for each other. There are also brothels where male employees (not pimps) take care of bartending, security, etc.

You would be surprised as how safe and respectable it all becomes as soon as it's all overboard, legal and regulated rather than seedy and hidden away.

"The fact we as a society want to sanitise prostitution and make it look acceptable seems very nice on the surface"

Legalisation isn't about making prostitution "look acceptable". It's about making it safer.

"but I think it leads to more women entering prostitution"

I don't know if that is true. Do you have any numbers that can back up that claim? (Not being aggressive, just curious)

"and selling sex seems to be an awful way to make a living"

To you. And to me, but then again I have never even had a one-night-stand. However, I realise that other people have different views and know for a fact that some women prefer it to other kinds of labour (with long hours that pay much less).

As a man, I usually steer clear of these threads, but I heard about this on the BBC. My daughter is currently living in Leeds, so it caught my interest. I am torn between wishing prostitution away, and wanting the best of a bad situation for those women already involved. I am also wary of telling women what they can or cannot do with their own bodies. In short, I am not sure that there is a place for men in this debate. Or, if there is, what we can contribute.

MassiveStrumpet indeed, 'safe zone' implies women would be safe there, but if they are in a room with a man who has paid money for their body and feels it's his to temporarily 'own' and use, how safe is that!

oliviaclottedcream Re "What I mean is: no matter how much we try to police peoples sexual desires and their needs. Lust and the need for other people bodies for sexual fulfilment, will always find a way."

Really, let's just clarify that actually means something like no matter how much we as a society detest the idea of people buying and selling bodies for sex (primarily men doing the buying and quite considerably women being bought), the sexual desires and the so-called needs and lust of other people (predominantly men) will always find a way. How about the way being that they get their shit together and get into an 'adult' consensual sexual relationship that is not based on paying someone so they can use them.

"Both buyers and sellers need to be protected" Did you read either of the links I posted, did you see prostitutes being protected?

"...we need to make sure (as must we can() that they come to no harm." So what do you think the future holds for women and girls who are prostituted, exposed to drugs, abuse, mental cruelty? Is the prognosis good? I think the grown up answer would be no.

Re "I believe we'll be better able to do this is prostitution is out in the open, accepted and managed as best as humanly possible."

Would you also accept that male violence is unavoidable? Child cruelty? People are always going to do horrible things but we don't simply legalise things because it makes life easier. There are already laws to protect women and if we took the Swedish model of out-lawing paying for sex then the women/girls/other prostitutes would be further protected. In our society you can't just do what you want with your body or anyone else's.

There are rules as a society of what is acceptable. You can't sell your eggs, or your kidneys or walk down the street naked. Just because it is your own body you can't just do as you like.

And personally (IMHO), realistically I don't believe prostitutes are doing as they like. I believe they are coerced into prostitution, pushed, snared, trafficked etc. Some are virtually born into it as they are from generations of prostitutes. The fact that pimps (almost all men) can make money from women makes them appealing to groom and cultivate. Making that much harder would hopefully enable more women to stay out of prostitution.

Certainly the opposite appears to be true, legalisation leads to more women in prostitution. Does this suddenly mean all is OK? are they flocking to it because it is a wise career move? I don't believe so. It's just harder to police. And if things in society cause harm, then I do want them policed.

There may be a small minority of women and girls engaged in prostitution who took a different route but I don't think Pretty Woman was a documentary!