Laws that sex workers really want - anti-Nordic-model TED talk

I'm very sure Cote is a woman. She posts widely on feminist subjects and I generally agree with her views. Don't agree with this though. She's entitled to her opinion in any case, whatever I think.

We're all black lesbian teenaged single moms with cancer on the internet.

Cote says a lot of things. Cote says 'they' have a shockingly high IQ whilst also saying:

1. Pornography isn't prostitution

1. Most internet porn features pro bono exhibitionists

1. There's no trafficking into Amsterdam's brothels

1. The vast majority of prostitutes aren't expected to mingle body fluids and mucous membranes

I don't believe what Cote says has any validity.

sillage Côte is a longstanding member of MN and a woman. A woman who, as Ophelia points out, posts sensibly on lots of women rights subjects. This particular blind spot is baffling.

Sparrowhawk
*Prostitutes are expected to mingle body fluids and mucous membranes"

The vast majority I have seen don't. No kissing, intercourse only with condoms, and even those plasticky membrane things placed over the fanjo if client wants to do oral on the prostitute.*

You have got to be kidding, right?
Listen, these debates are bashed about on MN frequently. I entered prostitution aged 17 and am now approaching 40. Worked on-and-off since then. (actually I'm a designer-maker but my fallback for money has been sex work).

I have worked specialising in group sex since around year 2010 (part time) so am in frequent contact with other WG's from all around the world who come to London to do group-sex parties.

I have booked up with WGs working in establishments ranging from cheap flats to high end penthouses for group sex work. We always have a natter of some description.

Let me tell you OWO (oral without condom) is a near necessity of the job for practiclly all WGs.
BB (bareback)is frequently requested.
CIM is frequently requested (Come in mouth) just bloody look at a few profiles of WGs on Punternet or Adultwork to see how prevalent / expected these services are.

Decriminalisation makes these requests cheaper and more prevalant because more girls come in who agree to more hardcore acts for less money.

And Cote I am surprised that, considering your usual and agreeable positions from a feminist perspective, you are so pro-decrim.
Your statement but I see that as the fault of criminalisation, which forces prostitution underground and in the hands of criminal gangs. do you not understand that even Full legalisation puts prostitution in the hands of gangs, but just more of them? Do you not care about the wider implications ligitimising the reductionistic sexualisation of women and girls in society?

My experiences of "trafficking" are nuanced because a very fair few are held against their will such as the myth purports, but even still they are eager to come, earn money, do more and more for the money, hand a percentage over to some faceless bloke in Brazil or wherever, and the prices for services drops rapidly for all WGs who are working in the area. Actually many traffickers pay for the WG to get their boob job and hair extensions too. These girls can be fucking stunning. But many become trapped, unable to leave the profession.

Beachcomber has provided some actual facts. Please listen to them I'm saying this as a sex worker in favour of partial criminalisation such as here in the UK, or Nordic Model.

Most prostitutes obviously want their profession to be totally legal but I'd say they are willfully blind to the consequences both to themselves and to wider society.

" your 3 AM rant with a full reply,"

Like I said, you're not a thoughtful person. Those razor-sharp analyzing skills you want people to believe you have didn't consider that I don't live in the UK and it wasn't 3am when I posted.

People accessing porn for free on the internet (on a couple of websites you like to masturbate to) does not mean the prostitutes you're masturbating to for free weren't paid to be fucked on film. Your logic is totally whack.

You seem to draw a specious conclusion and then work backwards and against facts to build an argument for it. Every post you've made on this thread is coated in misogynistic wrong sauce.

The vast majority I have seen don't. No kissing, intercourse only with condoms, and even those plasticky membrane things placed over the fanjo if client wants to do oral on the prostitute

Funny, because a very quick google shows standard prices for sex/oral without a condom, and plenty of interviews where prostitutes say it's pretty standard not to use one for an extra fee.

In fact, a whole article slamming the new German law requiring them.

I guess we should just let people pay to bypass any safety regulations they don't like, that's capitalism for you.

Sorry Nordic model or not of

How is any situation that leads to German super brothels in any way tenable? If it's a choice been Nordic models of industrialised misery it's a no brained.

Cote
There are large numbers of women who have managed to exit prostitution and speak out against legalisation and want the Nordic Model . They face harassment and death threats from people of your view who want to silence them.

And you keep referring to the conversations you had in Amsterdam that seem to have not been at meaningful depth, with women in very specific circumstances where they are unlikely to speak freely, which has confirmed your own prejudice (since you limited your sample in this way on the outset).

Beach - It's OK not to agree on everything. My views on this subject are influenced by the time I spent on the ground, actually talking to the women who work in prostitution. If I were just reading crime statistics & websites promoting Nordic system like the one linked below, I would probably be determined to eradicate prostitution.

I'm not claiming that all are "happy hookers" but I know for a fact that the independent, unexploited, untrafficked, consenting prostitutes exist and they exist in large numbers in Amsterdam.

I understand this is not the case in most places, but I see that as the fault of criminalisation, which forces prostitution underground and in the hands of criminal gangs.

"Being in contact with another person's body is a recognised health risk, that's why doctors and nurses wear gloves. Is it somehow less of a health risk for a prostitute?"

So it's not the bodily fluids now but just the touch that is too dangerous. In that case I assume you want to outlaw massages, manicures, pedicures, psysios & etc?

I can understand the "Ban prostitution because it's harmful to society & many women" argument although I find it unworkable. Sorry but this new "Ban prostitution because touching people (not just bodily fluids) is dangerous" is not a convincing argument.

"Prostitutes are expected to mingle body fluids and mucous membranes"

The vast majority I have seen don't. No kissing, intercourse only with condoms, and even those plasticky membrane things placed over the fanjo if client wants to do oral on the prostitute.

Being in contact with another person's body is a recognised health risk, that's why doctors and nurses wear gloves. Is it somehow less of a health risk for a prostitute?

Cote I respect your opinion on a lot of things but on this I find your views defeatist and naive and not backed up by evidence (no matter how many happy fulfilled well off prostitutes you may personally know).

The Netherlands has a documented trafficking problem as a direct result of its policy on prostitution.

I have no interest in a discussion about prostitution which is only about the tiny minority of women who are there entirely on their own terms because that isn't actually a discussion about prostitution. It's a derail about the myth of the "happy hooker".

"Prostitutes are expected to mingle body fluids and mucous membranes"

The vast majority I have seen don't. No kissing, intercourse only with condoms, and even those plasticky membrane things placed over the fanjo if client wants to do oral on the prostitute.

Beach & venus - I don't have time to look into UN reports & compare countries, either, so will have to come back to that later.

I don't think it's acceptable to have women putting themselves at risk of disease and injury just because they want to either.

Builders have to wear work boots and hard hats. Nurses, doctors, cleaners and beauticians wear gloves when just touching skin.

Prostitutes are expected to mingle body fluids and mucous membranes. How, in a modern society, is that acceptable?

Guardian - "How would you know cote?"

I wouldn't, because I'm a doughnut, remember?

Stop writing to me, as I asked you to before. I am not interested in your ankle biting.

"these women do not represent the global institution of prostitution"

I haven't talked to representatives of the "global institution". I have talked to prostitutes and brothels in Amsterdam. The point I am trying to make is that the situation there is significantly better than that of the "global institution" where prostitution is banned and so operates underground.

You want to completely eliminate prostitution around the world, which is a great idea except that it is imho not workable. Where there is demand and supply, there will always be a market. This was the case with alcohol during Prohibition (which created the Mafia as we know it), it is the case with illegal drugs, and it will continue to be with prostitution.

I don't think we disagree about the horrors of traficking and forced prostitution. We disagree on how to tackle these evils. You think telling people they are not allowed will work (although they are not allowed now and it's not working). I think decriminalisation, controls & regulation will work much better.

Cote, the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime cites Holland as one of the worst countries in the world for trafficking.

Venus you are right. It is well known that the illegal trade flourishes where prostitution is legalised. cote just wasn't very stringent about looking into that when going to Amsterdam to conduct ...ahem.. "research"..

What Venus said.

Cote, policy about prostitution must be about the majority. It cannot be about the women you talk about who operate entirely on their own terms because we know that these women do not represent the global institution of prostitution.

The facts, reality, experience of several countries and cultures are as follows;

Most girls and women do not want to be in prostitution.
There are not enough of Côte's "on their own terms" women to supply the male demand for sexual access to girls and women.
Legalization and decriminalization increase demand not only for legal forms of prostitution but also illegal such as child prostitution and overtly violent and abusive sex.
Pimping and trafficking are very lucrative.
Pimps and traffickers do not care about harm or harm reduction.

In order to meet demand and make as much money as possible pimps and traffickers coerce and force vulnerable, poor, young girls and women via well documented techniques and routes. These include false job adverts, preying on children exiting the care system, loverboying, emotional abuse, rape, exposure to pornography and drugs, battery, death threats, imprisonment, financial abuse, etc.

Harm is not reduced.

I have not seen a single trafficked woman made to work against her will in Amsterdam

How would you know cote? What lengths did you go to, to speak to the women in private flats, etc?

I have not seen a single trafficked woman made to work against her will in Amsterdam

How would you know cote? What lengths did you go to, to get past the lines they tell the regulators who come to inspect?